Bid Evaluation Guide - Asian Development Bank (ADB)

Guide on Bid Evaluation This guide is intended to provide guidance to borrowers on bid evaluation procedures and how to prepare a bid evaluation report to be submitted to ADB, in connection with the procurement of contracts financed in whole or in part by an ADB loan or grant, or by ADB-administered funds. About the Asian Development Bank ADB’s vision is an Asia and Pacific region free of poverty. Its mission is to help its developing member countries reduce poverty and improve the quality of life of their people. Despite the region’s many successes, it remains home to a large share of the world’s poor. ADB is committed to reducing poverty through inclusive economic growth, environmentally sustainable growth, and regional integration. Based in Manila, ADB is owned by 67 members, including 48 from the region. Its main instruments for helping its developing member countries are policy dialogue, loans, equity investments, guarantees, grants, and technical assistance. GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION June 2018 ASIAN DEVELOPMENT BANK 6 ADB Avenue, Mandaluyong City 1550 Metro Manila, Philippines www.adb.org ASIAN DEVELOPMENT BANK GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION June 2018 ASIAN DEVELOPMENT BANK Creative Commons Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 IGO license (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0 IGO) © 2018 Asian Development Bank 6 ADB Avenue, Mandaluyong City, 1550 Metro Manila, Philippines Tel +63 2 632 4444; Fax +63 2 636 2444 www.adb.org Some rights reserved. Published in 2018. ISBN 978-92-9261-266-5 (print), 978-92-9261-267-2 (electronic) Publication Stock No. TIM189440-2 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.22617/TIM189440-2 The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Asian Development Bank (ADB) or its Board of Governors or the governments they represent. ADB does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this publication and accepts no responsibility for any consequence of their use. The mention of specific companies or products of manufacturers does not imply that they are endorsed or recommended by ADB in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned. By making any designation of or reference to a particular territory or geographic area, or by using the term “country” in this document, ADB does not intend to make any judgments as to the legal or other status of any territory or area. This work is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 IGO license (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0 IGO) http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/igo/. By using the content of this publication, you agree to be bound by the terms of this license. For attribution and permissions, please read the provisions and terms of use at https://www.adb.org/terms-use#openaccess. This CC license does not apply to non-ADB copyright materials in this publication. If the material is attributed to another source, please contact the copyright owner or publisher of that source for permission to reproduce it. ADB cannot be held liable for any claims that arise as a result of your use of the material. Please contact pubsmarketing@adb.org if you have questions or comments with respect to content, or if you wish to obtain copyright permission for your intended use that does not fall within these terms, or for permission to use the ADB logo. Notes: In this publication, “$” refers to United States dollars. Corrigenda to ADB publications may be found at http://www.adb.org/publications/corrigenda. Printed on recycled paper iii Contents Preface�� v Part 1 Bid Evaluation Procedure and Reporting�� 1 Section 1: General�� 2 A. Introduction��2 B. Purpose of Bid Evaluation��3 C. Principles in Bid Evaluation��3 D. ADB’s Bidding Procedures under Competitive Bidding��5 Section 2: Bid Evaluation Procedure�� 7 A. Step 1: Opening and Preliminary Examination of Bids��7 1. Basic Data��7 2. Record of Bid Opening.............................................................................................................................................................7 3. Preliminary Examination of Bids...........................................................................................................................................8 4. Clarifications, Deviations, Reservations, and Omissions��8 B. Step 2: Determination of Substantial Responsiveness of Bids��9 1. Substantial Responsiveness to Commercial Terms and Conditions ��9 2. Substantial Responsiveness to Technical Requirements in Procurement of Goods and Procurement of Plant (Supply Component) ��10 3. Substantial Responsiveness to Technical Requirements in Procurement of Works and Procurement of Plant (Adequacy of Technical Proposal) ��11 4. Preparation of Table of Substantive Responsiveness of Bids��11 5. Substantial Responsiveness of Bidders under a Two-Envelope Bidding Procedure��12 6. Substantial Responsiveness of Bidders under a Two-Stage Bidding Procedure��12 C. Step 3: Detailed Evaluation of Price Bids��13 1. Preparation of Table of Bid Prices ....................................................................................................................................13 2. Determination of Number of Bids for Detailed Evaluation ....................................................................................14 3. Detailed Evaluation of Price Bids��14 4. Financial Adjustment of Bid Prices (Commercial Aspects)....................................................................................15 5. Financial Adjustment of Bid Prices (Technical Aspects).........................................................................................16 6. Detailed Evaluation of Bids for a Civil Works Contract��18 7. Application of Domestic Preference Scheme��20 8. The Lowest Evaluated Substantially Responsive Bid��21 9. Abnormally Low Bids��21 iv CONTENTS D. Step 4: Confirmation of Qualifications and Recommendation for Contract Award��22 1. Evaluation of Qualifications��22 2. Multiple Contract Evaluation��22 3. Award of Contract��22 Section 3: Preparation of Bid Evaluation Report.............................................................................................24 A. Single-Stage: One-Envelope Bidding Procedure��24 B. Single-Stage: Two-Envelope Bidding Procedure��26 C. Two-Stage and Two-Stage: Two-Envelope Bidding Procedures��26 Appendixes��27 1 Basic Data Sheet...................................................................................................................................................................... 28 2 Record of Bid Opening.......................................................................................................................................................... 30 3(A) Table of Substantial Responsiveness of Bids (Commercial Terms)—Supply Contract............................... 33 3(B) Table of Substantial Responsiveness of Bids (Commercial Terms)—Civil Works......................................... 35 3(C)Table of Substantial Responsiveness of Bids (Commercial Terms)—Plant Design– Supply–Installation��37 4 Table of Substantial Responsiveness of Bids (Technical Requirements)—Supply Contract.................... 39 5(A) Table of Salient Features of Bids (Commercial Terms and Conditions)—Supply Contract....................... 40 5(B) Table of Salient Features of Bids (Commercial Terms and Conditions)—Civil Works................................ 42 5(C)Table of Salient Features of Bids (Commercial Terms and Conditions)—Plant Design– Supply–Installation��43 5A-1 Table of Salient Features of Bids (Technical Requirements)—Supply Contract��44 6(A) Table of Bid Prices (Supply Contract)�� 45 6(B) Table of Bid Prices (Civil Works Contract)�� 46 6(C) Table of Bid Prices (Plant Contract)...........................................................................................................................................47 7(A) Table of Bid Price Adjustment (Supply Contract)��48 7(B) Table of Bid Price Adjustment (Civil Works Contract)��49 7(C) Table of Bid Price Adjustment (Plant Design–Supply–Installation)��51 8 Evaluation of Bidders’ Qualifications............................................................................................................................... 54 Part 2 Examples of Bid Evaluation��55 Example 1: Supply Contract��56 Example 2: Civil Works Contract................................................................................................................................................... 86 Example 3: Design, Supply, and Installation Contract........................................................................................................119 v Preface The principles and procedures outlined in this Guide on Bid Evaluation (hereinafter referred to as “the Guide”) are as prescribed by the Procurement Guidelines (2015, as amended from time to time) (“Guidelines”) and the Procurement Regulations for ADB Borrowers: Goods, Works, Nonconsulting and Consulting Services (2017, as amended from time to time) (“Regulations”); 1 and are applicable to the procurement of goods (“Goods” which includes related services2); works (“Works”) and plant design, supply, and installation (”Plant”) that are financed in whole or in part by an Asian Development Bank (ADB) loan or grant or by ADB-administered funds. In accordance with the Guidelines/Regulations, ADB requires its borrowers or recipients of grants (hereinafter referred to as “Borrowers”) or their Project Executing Agencies (“Executing Agencies”) to submit a “Bid Evaluation Report” for ADB’s approval prior to award of contract in case the contract is subject to ADB prior review.3 Bid Evaluation Reports prepared by Borrowers, Executing Agencies, and their consultants (“Consultants”) in response to ADB’s requirements have often been inadequate in form and substance; in many cases, ADB principles and procedures for procurement have not been fully met or, in some instances, violated. In such cases, it becomes necessary for ADB to obtain additional information or to request clarifications and additional analyses after the receipt and initial review of the report. Such delays have frequently necessitated requests to bidders for extension of the bid validity period; however, if the bidder that has submitted the lowest evaluated bid price does not wish to comply with that request, it would lead to the award of the contract to another bidder. This consequence is highly undesirable, not only for the Executing Agency which has to pay a higher price than necessary for the implementation of a project, but also for bidders who are forced to maintain their bid validity for an unreasonable period of time or, after incurring the expenses of bidding, to withdraw from the competition. Finally, such developments are undesirable from an operational point of view since ADB is responsible, under the terms of its Charter, to ensure that projects which it finances are carried out with due regard to “economy and efficiency.” Losing the opportunity to award a contract on time to the lowest evaluated substantially responsive bidder is neither economical nor efficient. Given the difficulties inherent in the evaluation process and in the preparation of complete, accurate, and concise Bid Evaluation Reports, the Guide has been written to provide Borrowers, Executing Agencies, and their Consultants with guidance on bid evaluation procedures and on the format of the report to be submitted to ADB. Part 1 of the Guide sets out a systematic step-by-step bid evaluation procedure covering all relevant factors which must be taken into account in determining the lowest evaluated substantially responsive bid in accordance with the terms and conditions of the bidding document. It also illustrates how the report to ADB should be put together using the tables of analysis prepared during the evaluation process. Part 2 of the Guide consists of three examples of bid evaluation reports: one for a supply contract involving the procurement of goods; one for a civil works contract; and one for a design, supply, and installation contract involving the procurement of plant, or equipment, and installation works under a single responsibility or turnkey contract. 1 2 3 The relevant project financing agreement indicates whether the Guidelines or Regulations apply. The term “Services” does not include consulting services which are of an intellectual and advisory nature requiring evaluation of technical proposals that offer tailored approaches, methodologies, and specially qualified experts. The project procurement plan specifies which contracts are subject to ADB prior review. vi PREFACE Use of the procedures proposed in the Guide are recommended. It is recognized that in some procurement cases it may be necessary to modify the procedures, including the tables of analysis, to suit the nature of the particular procurement being undertaken. ADB hopes that the information provided in the Guide will be useful and will help to reduce or eliminate the problems which have been encountered in the past. However, it should be noted that the purpose of the Guide is to provide assistance to Executing Agencies on bid evaluation reflecting the procurement principles and practices embodied in the Guidelines/Regulations. In case of ambiguities or discrepancies between this Guide and the provisions of the financing agreement or the provisions of the bidding document, the provisions of the bidding documents or financing agreement (in order of priority in the event of inconsistency) prevail over the Guide. Any additional information on procurement under projects financed in whole or in part by an ADB loan or grant or by ADB administered funds can be obtained from Procurement, Portfolio and Financial Management Department (PPFD) Asian Development Bank 6 ADB Avenue, Mandaluyong City 1550 Metro Manila, Philippines E-mail: procurement@adb.org Tel: +63 2 632 4444 Fax: +63 2 636 2444 [Attn: Director General, PPFD] www.adb.org 1 PART 1 Bid Evaluation Procedure and Reporting 2 Section 1: General A. Introduction 1.1 Procurement under investment lending projects financed in whole or in part by an Asian Development Bank (ADB) loan or grant or by ADB-administered funds must be carried out in accordance with the policy, principles, practices, and procedures laid down in the Procurement Guidelines (2015, as amended from time to time) or the Procurement Regulations for ADB Borrowers: Goods, Works, Nonconsulting and Consulting Services (2017, as amended from time to time),1 hereinafter referred to as “the Guidelines/ Regulations.” The policies applicable to procurement that have been incorporated in the Guidelines/ Regulations are derived from the provisions of The Agreement Establishing the Asian Development Bank (“the Charter”). The Articles relating to procurement that are stipulated in the Charter are: (i) the proceeds of any loan shall be used only for procurement in member countries of goods and services produced in member countries;2 and (ii) ADB shall ensure that the proceeds of any loan made by ADB are used only for the purpose for which it was approved, with due attention given to considerations of economy and efficiency.3 The Guidelines/Regulations built upon these Articles to define six core principles to guide ADB’s procurement procedures and requirements: economy, efficiency, fairness, transparency, quality, and value for money.4 1.2 All procurements financed or administered by ADB must conform to the above core principles set forth in the Charter and the Guidelines/Regulations. Further, ADB, being a public international, multilateral development finance institution, has an obligation to provide adequate, fair, and equal opportunity to supply goods, works, and services under ADB-financed or administered projects to interested and eligible bidders. If any of these core principles are not followed in the procurement process, including bid evaluation and contract award, ADB may refuse to finance that particular procurement and cancel the corresponding portion of the loan. 1.3 1 2 3 4 Bidding documents approved for ADB-financed or administered procurements should include the provisions necessary to satisfy ADB’s principles, practices and procedures. Evaluation of bids must be consistent with the terms and conditions stipulated in the bidding document. Fair, accurate, and transparent evaluation of bids is one of the most important aspects of procurement. Also, ADB must be satisfied that its objectives of economy, efficiency, transparency, and fairness among bidders have been met. This does not apply to alternative procurement arrangements allowed under the Regulations. Article 14 (ix) of the Charter. Article 14 (xi) of the Charter. Quality and value for money are two new principles in the Regulations. GENERAL B. Purpose of Bid Evaluation 1.4 The main purpose of bid evaluation is to determine the lowest evaluated substantially responsive bid among the bids submitted on or before the bid closing date and time specified in the bidding document. The lowest evaluated substantially responsive bid may or may not necessarily be the lowest priced bid. In order to determine accurately the lowest evaluated substantially responsive bid in accordance with the terms and conditions of the bidding document, a logical systematic evaluation procedure designed to cover all aspects of the evaluation process as described in the bidding document should be followed. There may be contracts requiring complex solutions with a combination of goods, works, or services, where value for money may not be achieved by using “lowest evaluated bid” as the contract award criterion; rather, striking a balance between cost and quality may be necessary to meet intended development targets. Bid evaluation for this type of contract may require different methods (e.g., using merit point or scoring systems), which are not covered in this Guide.5 C. Principles in Bid Evaluation6 1.5 There are certain principles and practices of ADB in a bid evaluation that must be clearly understood and observed in the bid evaluation process. 1. Prompt Public Bid Opening The time for bid opening shall be the same as for the deadline for bid submission or promptly thereafter. Preserving the integrity of bid submission is essential, which also promotes transparency at the very start of the bid evaluation process. 2. Confidentiality of Procedures After the public opening of bids, no information relating to the examination, clarification, and evaluation of bids, and recommendations concerning awards, shall be communicated to any person not officially concerned with these procedures until the notification of the contract award has been made to the successful bidder. 3. Priority of Documents The Guidelines/Regulations provide that the rights and obligations of the Executing Agency and the bidders offering to supply goods and perform the works for a particular procurement activity under a project are governed by the bidding document, and not by the Guidelines/ Regulations or the financing agreement. After the issuance of the bidding document for a particular contract, the procurement process is directed by the provisions of that bidding document. Should any inconsistency arise for any specific procurement between the bidding document and this Guide, the bidding document shall prevail. 5 6 Executing Agencies may refer to appropriate Guidance Notes or User’s Guides issued by ADB for different bid evaluation methods. This generally applies for the default bidding procedure of “Single-Stage: One-Envelope” following postqualification, unless otherwise specified. See Part D for other bidding procedures. 3 4 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION 4. Clarification and Modification of Bids No bidder will be permitted to modify its bid after the bids have been opened.7 Only clarifications, which do not change the substance or price of the bid may be requested or accepted by the Executing Agency. The request for clarifications and the response by the bidder shall be in writing or by acceptable electronic means (such as facsimile or scanned documents sent through e-mail). Any response to an inquiry of the Executing Agency which leads to a change in the bid price or in the substance of the bid shall be treated as a modification and shall not be considered in the bid evaluation. The records of all clarifications sought and received must be kept by the Executing Agency and attached to the bid evaluation report. 5. Rejection of Bids All valid bids received shall be evaluated in accordance with the criteria, methods, and procedures provided in the bidding document, and only those bids which do not substantially meet the specifications, bidder qualifications and other requirements of the bidding document may be rejected. 6. Currency of Bid Evaluation Bid prices expressed in different currencies shall be converted into a single currency for evaluation and comparison purposes, using the selling exchange rates prescribed for similar transactions on the date and from an official source (such as the central bank) specified in the bidding document. 7. Qualifications and Track Record of the Bidder Only the qualifications and track record of the Bidder itself are considered in the evaluation, and not those of the Bidder’s subsidiaries, parent entities, affiliates, or subcontractors, unless specifically permitted in the bidding document. For certain key elements or activities of required experience the bidding document may allow the required experience to be met by specialist subcontractors/ manufacturers. 8. Extension of Bid Validity Period The Executing Agency shall make every effort to complete bid evaluation and contract award before the expiration of bid validity. The validity of bids may only be extended in exceptional circumstances. If during the evaluation process an extension of bid validity is considered necessary, all those who submitted bids that have not otherwise been withdrawn shall be asked to extend the validity of their bids. Bidders who are willing to extend the validity of their bids shall not be permitted to modify the substance or price of their bids. They must, however, be required to extend the validity of their bid securities or bid securing declaration. The bid securities of bidders who do not extend the validity of their bids shall be returned to them promptly. 9. Rejection of All Bids The rejection of all bids is justified when the bids submitted are not substantially responsive or where none of the bids received meet the specifications, bidder qualifications, and other requirements, or where there is evidence of lack of competition. The rejection of all bids and calls for new bids solely for the reason of high prices are not accepted by ADB. Where all bid prices have substantially exceeded the cost estimate, the Borrower may, instead of calling for new bids, and after consultation with ADB, negotiate with the lowest evaluated bidder for a reduction of the bid price. If no satisfactory contract can be concluded, rebidding should be initiated with appropriate modification of the scope of the contract. 7 This is true for the Single-Stage: One-Envelope and Single-Stage: Two-Envelope bidding procedures. In the Two-Stage and Two-Stage: Two-Envelope bidding procedures, modifications may be requested by the Executing Agency for the second stage. GENERAL D. ADB’s Bidding Procedures under Competitive Bidding 1.6 ADB has adopted four competitive bidding procedures which may be selected by the Executing Agency to suit the nature of the particular procurement: (i) Single-Stage: One-Envelope, (ii) Single-Stage: TwoEnvelope, (iii) Two-Stage, and (iv) Two-Stage: Two-Envelope. The procurement plan agreed by ADB shall specify the bidding procedure to be followed for each contract financed in whole or in part by an ADB loan or grant or by ADB-administered funds. 1. Single-Stage: One-Envelope Bidding Procedure In the Single-Stage: One-Envelope bidding procedure, bidders submit bids in one envelope containing both the technical proposal and the price proposal, which are opened in public at the date and time advised in the bidding document. The bids are evaluated and the contract is awarded to the bidder who meets eligibility and qualifications requirements and whose bid has been determined to be the lowest evaluated substantially responsive bid. 2. Single-Stage: Two-Envelope Bidding Procedure In the Single-Stage: Two-Envelope bidding procedure, the bidders submit simultaneously two separately sealed envelopes, one containing the technical bid and the other the price bid enclosed together in an outer single envelope. Initially, only the technical bids are opened at the date and time advised in the bidding document. The price bids remain sealed and are held in custody by the Executing Agency. The technical bids are evaluated by the Executing Agency. No amendments or changes to the technical bids are permitted. The objective of the exercise is to allow the Executing Agency to evaluate the technical bids without reference to price. Bidders must also meet eligibility and qualifications requirements. Bids of bidders who do not conform to the specified requirements may be rejected as deficient or nonresponsive bids. Following the technical evaluation, the price bids of bidders that submitted substantially responsive technical bids are opened in public at a date and time advised by the Executing Agency. The price bids of the technically responsive bidders are evaluated and the award of contract is made to the bidder whose bid has been determined to be the lowest evaluated substantially responsive bid. 3. Two-Stage Bidding Procedure In the Two-Stage bidding procedure, the bidders initially submit their first stage bids that include the technical proposals often in accordance with conceptual designs or performance specifications provided in the bidding document, but without prices. The technical proposals are opened at the date and time advised in the bidding document. The first stage bids with technical proposals are evaluated by the Executing Agency and clarified or discussed with the bidders. Any deficiencies, extraneous provisions, and unsatisfactory technical features are pointed out to the bidders whose clarifications and/or comments are carefully evaluated. The bidders who meet the eligibility and qualifications requirements are allowed to revise or adjust their technical proposals in the second stage to meet the final requirements of the Executing Agency. The objective of the exercise is to ensure that all technical proposals to be considered in the second stage conform to the same acceptable technical standard and meet the final technical requirements of the Executing Agency. Bids of bidders who are unable or not prepared to amend their technical proposals so as to conform to the final technical standard required by the Executing Agency may be rejected as deficient or nonresponsive bids. After the evaluation of first stage bids, the second stage starts with the invitation to bidders who have been declared substantially responsive and meeting the minimum qualification requirements to submit financial or price proposals together with the revised technical proposals in compliance with the acceptable technical 5 6 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION standards. The second stage invitation documents shall include required changes to the technical bids of each bidder to comply with the final requirements, together with amendments to the bidding document, if any. The price proposals and revised technical proposals are opened in public at a date and time advised by the Executing Agency. In setting this date, the Executing Agency should allow sufficient time for bidders to incorporate the changes required in their technical proposals and prepare price proposals. The price proposals and revised technical proposals are evaluated and the award of contract is made to the bidder whose bid has been determined to be the lowest evaluated substantially responsive bid. 4. Two-Stage: Two-Envelope Bidding Procedure In the Two-Stage: Two-Envelope bidding procedure, the bidders submit simultaneously two sealed envelopes, one containing the technical bid and the other the price bid, enclosed together in an outer single envelope comprising the first stage bid. Initially, only the technical bids are opened at the date and time indicated in the bidding document. The price bids remain sealed and are held in custody by the Executing Agency. The technical bids are evaluated, and if the Executing Agency requires amendments or changes to the technical proposals such amendments and changes are discussed with the bidders. The objective of the exercise is to ensure that all technical proposals of bidders who meet the eligibility and qualifications requirements, and to be considered in the second stage, conform to the same acceptable technical standard and meet the final technical requirements of the Executing Agency. First stage bids of bidders who are unable or unwilling to amend their technical proposals so as to conform to the final technical standards may be rejected as deficient bids. Following the evaluation of the first stage technical proposals, including the required amendments or changes to the technical proposals if applicable, the bidders are invited in the second stage to submit modified bid proposals consisting of revised technical bids and supplementary price proposals based on the revised technical standards agreed. The supplementary price proposals should only contain the changes in price resulting from the required changes in the technical proposals. Supplementary price proposals which contain changes other than those discussed during technical evaluation may result in rejection of the bids. The original price proposals, the supplementary price proposals, and the revised technical proposals are all opened in public at a date and time advised by the Executing Agency. In setting this date, the Executing Agency should allow sufficient time for bidders to incorporate the changes required in their technical proposals and prepare the supplementary price proposals that reflect the changes. The price proposals and the supplementary price proposals are evaluated and the award of contract is made to the bidder whose bid has been determined to be the lowest evaluated substantially responsive bidder. 1.7 The Single-Stage: One-Envelope bidding procedure is the default or main bidding procedure and is used in most of the procurements financed or administered by ADB. The Single-Stage: Two-Envelope bidding procedure has been increasingly used in certain regions as it allows bids at the first part of evaluation, to be evaluated on purely technical and commercial grounds without reference to price. The Two-Stage and TwoStage: Two-Envelope bidding procedures may be adopted in large and complex contracts where technically unequal proposals are likely to be encountered or where, for a given set of performance specifications, there are two or more equally acceptable technical solutions available to the Executing Agency. 1.8. In addition, a bidding procedure may be used together with prequalification or postqualification procedures. Generally, postqualification is applied. Prequalification may be necessary for large or complex contracts, or when the high costs of preparing detailed bids could discourage participation. If prequalification is applied, qualifications of bidders are examined separately in advance of the bidding process. 1.9 ADB issues Standard Bidding Documents (SBDs) for different bidding procedures and for different types of procurement (Goods, Works, or Plant). This Guide assumes that the actual bidding document issued by an Executing Agency has closely followed the SBD issued by ADB for the particular type of procurement and bidding procedure. 7 Section 2: Bid Evaluation Procedure The evaluation procedure described herein has been demonstrated in ADB procurement experience to be generally adequate for the expeditious evaluation of bids to determine the lowest evaluated substantially responsive bid in accordance with the terms, conditions, and specifications of the bidding documents. Further, the evaluation procedure, when strictly followed, provides a fair and transparent competitive environment to all bidders leading to an efficient and accurate outcome. There are four distinct steps in the bid evaluation process which should be followed in a logical sequence. This section basically describes the procedure under a Single-Stage: One-Envelope bidding procedure following postqualification, unless otherwise specified. The evaluation procedures can be modified to meet the requirements of the various types of contracts and bidding procedures.8 A. Step 1: Opening and Preliminary Examination of Bids 1. Basic Data 2.1 Before starting the actual evaluation, it is necessary to collect all the key information pertaining to the bidding so that it is readily available and the evaluation process is kept in proper perspective. A sample of the Basic Data Sheet is shown in Appendix 1. 2. Record of Bid Opening 2.2 All bids received prior to the deadline set for bid submission shall be opened at the time, date, and place specified in the bidding document. All bidders that have submitted bids and their representatives are invited to be present at the opening of bids, and all those present at the bid opening shall be required to sign the attendance sheet. A Record of Bid Opening, identifying all the bids received, including bidder name, address, and nationality, the presence or absence of the bid security or bid securing declaration, if either one is required, and the bid prices read out publicly, including alternative bids if any, should be formally prepared. All withdrawals, substitutions, modifications, and discounts offered should also be recorded, as well as any observations of deficiencies in signatures, authorizations, format, and other elements of the bid security or bid securing declaration, and the bid submission sheet or letter of bid. The Record of Bid Opening should be signed by all members of the bid opening committee or persons responsible for bid opening. All bidders present are requested to sign the record in order to provide confirmation that data have been read out and recorded correctly. A sample format of the Record of Bid Opening is shown in Appendix 2. For a contract subject to ADB prior review, a copy of the completed record should be sent to ADB for information immediately after the public opening of bids. 8 Refer to the Standard Bidding Documents (SBDs) prepared by ADB for different bidding procedures for the procurement of goods, works and plant. 8 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION 3. Preliminary Examination of Bids 2.3 The purpose of this step is to examine what the actual contents of the bids received are, and whether they are basically complete as required by the bidding document, before the Executing Agency can proceed to the next step in bid evaluation. 2.4 First, it is necessary to confirm the substantial compliance of the following aspects, as recorded in the Record of Bid Opening in terms of form and content, and determine whether any deficiencies9 recorded may or may not be clarified or rectified: (i) bid securities or bid securing declaration, if either one is required; (ii) signatures on the bidding documents; and (iii) the form of authorization for the authorized signatory of the bid. 2.5 Second, the contents of the envelope needs to be checked against the requirements of the bidding document to determine: (i) whether the documents submitted are intended for the advertised procurement; (ii) whether or not documents establishing the eligibility of bidders and goods have been furnished; (iii) whether or not documents required to assess the qualification of a bidder with respect to its financial and technical capability to undertake the contract have been provided;10 and (iv) whether bids are generally in order for further detailed evaluation. 2.6 Third, the identity of the bidder needs to be checked, whether it is a single entity or a joint venture (JV). In case of JVs, the examination shall determine whether joint venture agreements, or letters of intent to enter into an agreement, if required, are submitted . 4. Clarifications, Deviations, Reservations, and Omissions 2.7 Examination of each of the above areas may require clarifications from bidders. In addition, in the course of the examination, deviations, reservations, or omissions in the form and contents of the documents submitted are identified and recorded for further clarification and/or detailed evaluation. 2.8 In the Two-Stage and Two-Stage: Two-Envelope bidding procedures, clarifications may be requested and responded in a formal meeting between the Executing Agency and each bidder. The results of these clarification meetings shall be considered in the first stage evaluation report and the recommendations of the Executing Agency for the second stage. 9 10 Ensure that only the provisions of the bidding document are applied in the assessment. Rectification of minor deficiencies in the required documents is generally acceptable. As the Executing Agency examines the documents substantiating eligibility and qualifications of bidders, it is acceptable practice, particularly under two-envelope and two-stage procedures, to extend the examination to the full-scale Evaluation of Qualifications, which is discussed in Part D of this section under Step 4. BID EVALUATION PROCEDURE B. Step 2: Determination of Substantial Responsiveness of Bids 2.9 The scrutiny of details of bids for substantial responsiveness to the provisions of the bidding document is the most critical aspect of the evaluation of bids and normally takes the longest time. At this stage, grounds for rejection of bids indicated in the bidding document are applied to the observations and conclusions of the examination of bids. After confirming from the details of the documents and considering clarifications requested and obtained, the Executing Agency determines whether the deviations, reservations, and omissions observed are material or major, or if they are not, in which case they are nonmaterial or minor. Bids (or Technical Proposals in the Single-Stage: Two-Envelope, Two-Stage, or Two-Stage: TwoEnvelope bidding procedure) without any deviations from the requirements of the bidding document are declared responsive, while those with deviations that are confirmed to be material or major are declared nonresponsive. Those bids (or Technical Proposals) with nonmaterial or minor deviations, which are acceptable or rectifiable, are declared substantially responsive. A bid is also considered non-responsive if any deviation on critical requirements of the bidding document or any condition stated in the submitted bid cannot be reasonably translated into monetary values for financial adjustment. A major or material deviation is one which (a) has an effect on the validity of the bid; or (b) has been specified in the bidding document as grounds for rejection of the bid; or (c) is a deviation from the commercial terms or the technical specifications in the bidding document whose effect on the bid price is substantial but cannot be given a monetary value. The purpose of the exercise is to reject bids which are not substantially responsive to the commercial and technical requirements and advance only the substantially responsive submissions to the next step, which is the detailed evaluation of price bids. 1. Substantial Responsiveness to Commercial Terms and Conditions 2.10 All bids must be checked for substantial responsiveness to the commercial terms and conditions of the bidding document. Examples of nonconformance to commercial terms and conditions, which are justifiable grounds for rejection of a bid, are: (a) failure to sign the Bid Form and Price Schedules by the authorized person or persons; (b) failure of a bidder to satisfy eligibility requirements, which include being from an eligible source country of ADB, not being in a situation of conflict of interest, not being under suspension from bidding by the Purchaser or Employer as a result of the execution of a Bid–Securing Declaration, etc. Eligibility requirements must also be satisfied by the goods and plant equipment/materials offered; (c) failure to submit a bid security or bid securing declaration as specified in the bidding document; (d) failure to satisfy the bid validity period (i.e., the bid validity period is shorter than specified in the bidding document; (e) inability to meet the critical delivery schedule or work schedule clearly specified in the bidding document, where such schedule is a crucial condition with which bidders must comply; (f) conditional bids, i.e., conditions in a bid which limit the bidder’s responsibility to accept an award (e.g., acceptance of the award is subject to government’s approval for export, prior sale or availability of critical material available in the market, or a bid submitted with a price escalation condition when a fixed price bid is specified, or qualifications to the Conditions of Contract); (g) inability to accept the price adjustment formula of the bidding document; and/or (h) failure to submit major supporting documents required by the bidding document to determine substantial responsiveness of a bid. 9 10 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION 2.Substantial Responsiveness to Technical Requirements in Procurement of Goods and Procurement of Plant (Supply Component) 2.11 All bids must be checked for substantial responsiveness to the technical requirements of the bidding document normally found in sections Scope of Supply or Employer’s Requirements of the bidding document. Examples of nonconformance to technical requirements, which are justifiable grounds for rejection of a bid, are as follows: (a) failure to bid for the required scope of work (e.g., for the entire works or a complete package or a complete schedule) as instructed in the bidding document and where failure to do so has been indicated as unacceptable; (b) failure to quote for a major item in the package;11 and/or (c) failure to meet major technical requirements (e.g., offering completely different types specified, plant capacity well below the minimum specified, equipment not able to perform the basic functions for which it is intended); (d) failure to submit type-test reports for critical equipment, as clearly specified in the bidding document. In respect of type-test reports, the provisions below are to be followed: 2.12 11 • Equipment which has never been tested for critical performance by an independent and well known testing laboratory shall not be accepted. In such cases, a promise or agreement by a bidder to have the equipment tested after award of a contract is not acceptable. However, major equipment suppliers normally conduct the type tests in their own laboratories. The purchaser may accept such test certificates if (a) the testing laboratory has ISO9000 (or its equivalent) series certification, or (b) the tests have been witnessed by technically qualified representatives of earlier clients or purchasers. • Test reports to be acceptable must be related directly to the equipment offered. Test reports for a higher class of equipment are acceptable with a commitment to perform the type test on the particular equipment after the contract is awarded. Reports of critical tests conducted earlier than the date specified in the specifications should not be accepted. • Failure to submit some type-test reports with a bid need not be considered as a major deviation rendering the bid nonresponsive. A valid test report could be accepted subsequent to the bid closing date unless the bidding document specified otherwise. For complex turnkey contracts, involving the supply of a large quantity of equipment, the critical type-test certificates, if any, should be specified in the bidding document. For critical equipment, all required test reports must be submitted for assessing the technical acceptance of the bid. For “less than critical” equipment, some flexibility should be allowed, provided it is possible to assess the acceptability of the equipment based on available test reports. • Type-test reports of the same or similar equipment manufactured by a licensor or associated companies are only acceptable if they are jointly and severally bound under the contract. If alternative bids are permitted, the bidding document shall specify the conditions governing such bids. The methodology to be applied to bid evaluation and comparison for alternative bids should be specified clearly in the bidding document and these alternative bids should be included in the bid evaluation and evaluated in the manner specified in the bidding document. Where the bidding document is silent in respect of alternative bids, bidders may submit alternative bids in addition to their main bids. In such a A major item is approximately 10 percent or more of the total bid price or is an item that, if omitted, makes the bid substantially incomplete. BID EVALUATION PROCEDURE case, bid evaluation should be among main bids only to determine the lowest evaluated bidder. If the alternative bid of the lowest evaluated bidder is considered more advantageous than its main bid, such an alternative bid may be accepted. Where bidders have submitted a main bid and one or more alternative bids, each with its own bid security, the bids should be considered as main bids. 3.Substantial Responsiveness to Technical Requirements in Procurement of Works and Procurement of Plant (Adequacy of Technical Proposal) 2.13 In works and plant contracts, the evaluation of the technical proposal and technical alternatives is intended to confirm to the Executing Agency that a bidder demonstrates sufficient understanding of the requirements of the contract, and possesses an acceptable plan or strategy to complete the works within the required time. An adequate technical proposal should exhibit internal consistency among the required elements of the technical proposal covering the entire scope of work as described in Employer’s Requirements of the bidding document. These are the statement of work methods, including sourcing of materials, site organization, personnel and equipment mobilization schedule, and the construction and completion schedule. While inconsistencies among them may be clarified or rectified, omissions of certain key elements as required by the bidding document may lead to a non-responsive assessment under the Single-Stage: One-Envelope or Single-Stage: Two-Envelope bidding procedures. The assessment of the technical proposal may also confirm or raise doubts on the technical experience and qualifications claimed by a bidder. 4. Preparation of Tables of Substantial Responsiveness of Bids 2.14 In order to ensure that a thorough check of the responsiveness of all bids is carried out, a Table of Substantial Responsiveness to Commercial Terms and a Table of Substantial Responsiveness to Technical Requirements should be prepared. 2.15 The Table of Substantial Responsiveness to Commercial Terms should list all the important commercial conditions specified in the bidding document such as the bid security amount and validity period, terms of payment, liquidated damages, etc. The Table of Substantial Responsiveness to Technical Requirements should list the scope of supply (or scope of work for works contracts), delivery or work schedule, the important technical specifications of all major items of equipment and material (e.g., plant rating, capacity, speed, voltage and pressure, operating temperature, etc.), their performance characteristics (e.g., plant efficiency, fuel consumption, losses, etc.), and warranty period. 2.16 Every bid being evaluated should then be scrutinized in detail and the responsiveness of each should be checked against the lists in the two tables, and the bid’s conformity, partial conformity, or nonconformity to each item should be entered in the tables against the listed requirements. The bids that fail to conform to any of the major conditions should be considered non-responsive and should be rejected. The sample formats for the Tables of Substantial Responsiveness to Commercial Terms and to Technical Requirements are attached as Appendix 3 (3A for Supply, 3B for Works and 3C for Plant) and Appendix 4 (Sample for Supply only), respectively. Depending on the size and complexity of the contracts undergoing bidding, supplementary tables may need to be prepared. Ideally, the same Tables of Substantial Responsiveness should indicate conformity, partial conformity, or nonconformity, and present in summary form the salient features of the individual bids that formed the basis for declaring conformity or nonconformity. If the tables become unwieldy, or if discussion is extended to justify the assessment for conformity of many items, a separate Table of Salient Features of Bids may be prepared (See Appendix 5A to 5C for samples). In such a case, the Tables of Substantial Responsiveness provide the list of requirements of the bidding document with the summary conformity assessment, while the Table of Salient Features summarizes the bidder’s submissions and the basis of the assessment. 11 12 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION 2.17 In the process of evaluation of commercial or technical details, bidders may again be requested to provide clarifications of their bids where such clarifications are deemed necessary. Bidders are not permitted, however, to change the substance or price of their bids under the Single-Stage: One-Envelope and SingleStage: Two-Envelope procedures. Such clarifications and responses must be in writing. The records of all clarifications sought and received must be kept by the Executing Agency responsible for bid evaluation. 5.Substantial Responsiveness of Bidders under Single-Stage: Two-Envelope Bidding Procedure 2.18 Under the Single-Stage: Two-Envelope bidding procedure, determination of substantial responsiveness of bids also includes evaluation of qualifications of bidders. The next step of detailed evaluation of bids involving prices does not proceed immediately. The bid evaluation procedure pauses for the preparation of a technical bid evaluation report that consolidates the observations and conclusions of the examination of bids, the evaluation of qualifications, and the detailed determination of substantial responsiveness to the requirements of the bidding document. These conclusions with specific recommendations, particularly on the rejection of unqualified and nonresponsive bids, and whether minor deviations require financial adjustments during the bid price evaluation, need to undergo review and approval prior to the opening of financial proposals in the second envelopes of the responsive bids.12 The evaluation of bid prices is covered by the next evaluation step. 6.Substantial Responsiveness of Bidders under Two-Stage and Two-Stage: Two-Envelope Bidding Procedures 2.19 12 13 Under the Two-Stage and Two-Stage: Two-Envelope bidding procedures, determination of substantial responsiveness of bids also includes evaluation of qualifications of bidders. The next stage involving submission of prices does not proceed immediately. The first-stage bidding procedure ends with the preparation of a technical bid evaluation report that consolidates the observations and conclusions of the preliminary examination, the evaluation of bidders’ qualifications, clarification meetings with bidders, and the detailed determination of substantial responsiveness of bids to the requirements of the bidding document. These conclusions with specific recommendations will be incorporated in the following documents to be prepared by the Executing Agency: (i) First, any amendments to the bidding document13 found necessary by the Executing Agency after undertaking detailed evaluation of the bids and conducting clarification meetings up to that stage. (ii) Second, for each of the substantially responsive bidders, draft invitations to submit second-stage bids with individual memoranda are prepared with an appendix indicating any major deviations requiring rectification in the second stage submission, or other deviations that may either be acceptable or subject to replacement. The invitations will also indicate any amendments to the bidding document. For prior review of procurement decisions, approvals of both the Executing Agency’s authorities and ADB are required. If the procurement is under post review arrangement, the Executing Agency may proceed to the next step without ADB’s approval. The amendments to the bidding document must be issued to bidders invited to the second stage in accordance with the bidding document. BID EVALUATION PROCEDURE (iii) Third, a first-stage bid evaluation report that consolidates the observations and conclusions of the first-stage examination and detailed determination of substantial responsiveness to the requirements of the bidding document. The report shall explain in substantial detail the basis for either the rejection of nonresponsive technical proposals or the declaration of responsive technical proposals. Clarification requests and responses shall also be included. The first two documents are also included in the report. The recommendations of the first-stage report need to be decided upon prior to issuance of the invitations to submit the second-stage bids comprising of final technical proposals with corresponding bid prices. 2.20 The second stage of the Two-Stage and Two-Stage: Two-Envelope bidding procedures is price competition and therefore may not proceed without competing bids. In such a case, the bidding process shall be declared a failure due to lack of price competition, and technical proposals received shall be returned to bidders. The first stage bid evaluation report shall recommend how to proceed with the procurement of the subject contract. C. Step 3: Detailed Evaluation of Price Bids 1. Preparation of Table of Bid Prices 2.21 The cost to the executing agency of each bid offering as described by the evaluated technical proposal and validated commercial terms and conditions shall be determined in order to allow for a price comparison among the bids. The information contained in the Record of Bid Opening and supplemented by the Tables of Substantial Responsiveness to Commercial Terms and to Technical Requirements (and Tables of Salient Features, if utilized) need to be further supplemented by the actual bid price evaluation of each bid, and subsequently the comparison of evaluated bid prices. Therefore, it will be necessary to prepare the Table of Bid Prices setting out details such as the different items in the scope of supply or works, sections, schedules, and packages for detailed comparison. Arithmetic corrections, valid discounts, currency conversion and, to enable final bid comparison, the price adjustments due to the nonmaterial deviations, shall be indicated in this table. (a) 2.22 Arithmetic Correction The bids should be examined for arithmetical errors and, if found, should be corrected as specified in the bidding document. The bidders must accept the corrections of arithmetical errors. If a bidder refuses to accept the corrections of errors calculated in accordance with the provisions of the bidding document, its bid shall be rejected and its bid security shall be forfeited, or its bid securing declaration executed. (b) Discounts 2.23 When provided in the bidding document, discounts shall be considered but only those read out during the bid opening proceedings and properly recorded in the Record of Bid Opening. When multiple contracts are invited under the same bidding process, bidders may bid for more than one contract and may offer discounts if they are awarded multiple contracts. Such discounts shall be examined separately (See evaluation of multiple contracts in Step 4). 13 14 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION (c) Currency Conversion 2.24 Since bids may have been received from bidders from different countries and involve different currencies, it is necessary to convert all bid prices to the specified currency for bid comparison. The rates of exchange used should be in accordance with the provisions of the bidding document. Preferably, the bids should be arranged in the order of ascending price. A sample format for the Table of Bid Prices is shown in Appendix 5. 2. Determination of Number of Bids for Detailed Evaluation 2.25 All bids that have been determined to be substantially responsive shall normally be subject to detailed evaluation. However, when the number of substantially responsive bids is large, a decision should be made as to how many of them should be further evaluated in detail to determine the lowest evaluated bid. The spread of bid prices may help determine the course of action. Where, for example, the bid prices are clustered around the lowest, all the lower priced bids in the cluster, irrespective of the number, should be further evaluated. Where there is no cluster of lower priced bids, experience shows that detailed evaluation of the three lowest priced substantially responsive bids is generally adequate. The governing principle is that no bid should be excluded from further detailed evaluation if there exists a possibility that, as a result of various financial adjustments, it could become the lowest evaluated bid. Therefore, detailed evaluation should include all substantially responsive bids which have a reasonable chance of becoming the lowest evaluated bid. 3. Detailed Evaluation of Price Bids 2.26 Having determined the number of substantially responsive bids which should be further evaluated in detail, the next step is to scrutinize the selected bids systematically in order to compare and evaluate the bids on a common basis. 2.27 The Table of Substantial Responsiveness to Commercial Terms that lists all the important commercial conditions specified in the bidding document and any deviations from requirements of the bidding document, and should also state whether a financial adjustment14 to the bid is considered necessary as a consequence of any minor deviation or non-material nonconformity. 2.28 Similarly, the Table of Substantial Responsiveness to Technical Requirements that lists its salient features against the requirements of the bidding document should indicate whether a financial adjustment to the bid is necessary as a consequence of any minor deviation or non-material nonconformity. 2.29 If deviations to both commercial terms and technical requirements of the bidding document are numerous or the necessary discussion of a deviation lengthy, it may be preferable to prepare a separate table or sheet for each bidder. 2.30 It is through this systematic scrutiny that differences in bids, under detailed evaluation, are demonstrated. In this way, the ground is prepared for the application in the next step of price adjustments necessary to bring all bids to a common basis for price comparison and to determine the lowest evaluated bid. 14 Depending on the complexity of the contract undergoing bidding, the information may be shown in a separate table of salient features of bids. BID EVALUATION PROCEDURE 4. Financial Adjustment of Bid Prices (Commercial Aspects) 2.31 Bid price comparison is usually the final and the most critical step in the bid evaluation process. To do this properly, a clear understanding of the basic principles for comparison is vital: 2.32 (i) The bid prices should be adjusted for the purpose of bid comparison for those deviations which are permissible and which can be “translated” fairly into monetary values. The calculation of financial adjustment should be in the manner specified in the bidding document. (ii) All the adjustment factors and the basis of price comparison specified in the bidding document must be taken into account.15 Factors or other criteria not listed in the bidding document shall not be introduced during the bid evaluation. Depending on the items in the scope of supply or bill of quantities, the Table of Bid Prices may be expanded to include the itemized price adjustments. For more complicated contracts, particularly for plant contracts, the Table of Bid Prices may need to be split into the summary of the Table of Bid Prices and the Table of Bid Price Adjustments (see Appendix 6 and 7 for samples). The price adjustments need to correspond to the items requiring price adjustment as identified in the Tables of Substantial Responsiveness. (a) 2.33 Adjustment for Deviation from the Terms of Payment Deviation from the terms of payment is one of the very common deviations encountered in bids received. Unless specifically stipulated as a basis for rejection in the bidding document, bids offering different terms of payment should not necessarily be rejected as the monetary value of such deviation can be determined fairly. Instead of rejecting the bid, the proposed terms of payment should be analyzed and an amount added to the bid price to compensate for the earlier or larger payment requested. The amount to be added should be calculated using the commercial rate of interest relevant to the situation.16 (b) Adjustment for Deviation from the Delivery Schedule or Completion 2.34 This issue has two possible cases: first, for delivery or completion later than the time specified in the bidding document and, secondly, for delivery or completion earlier than specified in the bidding document. In principle, unless specifically stipulated as a basis for rejection in the bidding document, bids offering marginally different delivery or completion schedules should not be rejected. However, the bidding document should specify the time limits which are acceptable to the Executing Agency and the manner in which any price adjustment will be applied. 2.35 The price adjustment for later delivery or completion is calculated using the liquidated damages provision in the Conditions of Contract. The maximum limit for the price adjustment should normally be 10% of the bid price. Where bidders offer an earlier delivery or completion schedule that results in the Executing Agency incurring additional costs for storage, double handling, interest for early payments, early takeover, etc., the price adjustment should be calculated on the basis of such costs. Any bid which requires a price adjustment in excess of 10% for late or early delivery should be considered nonresponsive and the bid rejected. 15 16 It is of importance that relevant provisions in the bidding document are complete, specific and unambiguous. Any shortcomings in the bidding document are likely to create uncertainties leading to arbitrary decisions. Deviation from payment terms which involve risks to the Executing Agency, such as elimination of retention monies, should not be considered unless protected by an unconditional Bank guarantee. 15 16 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION 2.36 In the case where the Executing Agency has offered a bonus for early completion, price adjustment for such bonus should not be considered in bid evaluation. Such a bonus will be considered only during contract implementation if the contractor indeed manages to complete the works early. (c) Adjustment for Deviation from Provisions for Payment of Duties and Taxes 2.37 In supply contracts and in supply and installation contracts involving importation of goods, the cost of duties and taxes in the borrowing country shall not be included in the comparison of bid prices. The exclusion from bid comparison of the import tax element levied in the borrowing country in respect of imported goods in a supply contract is to avoid any distortion of bid competitiveness for various reasons such as the imposition of high differential tax rates, etc. ADB regards taxes on finished imported goods as an internal transfer of funds within the country and therefore they should not be taken into account in determining the economy and competitiveness of bids in a supply contract. 2.38 However, for evaluation purposes ADB permits taxes to be included in the bid price in civil works contracts.17 ADB considers that in civil works contracts both local contractors and foreign contractors have the equal right to choose locally produced or imported goods and services. Thus, both local and foreign contractors have fair and equal opportunities to quote their best prices. If the bidder fails to quote the cost of duties and taxes as specified in the bidding document, the cost of such duties and taxes should be estimated and added to its bid price for bid comparison, rather than the bid being rejected. 5. Financial Adjustment of Bid Prices (Technical Aspects) 2.39 Major deviations from the technical requirements which will result in the rejection of bids are discussed in Step 2 of this section on evaluation procedure. Other deviations, classified as minor or nonmaterial, may relate to a great number of requirements included in the technical specifications of the bidding document. They vary from contract to contract and depend on the nature of the requirements, materials, or works. Some deviations, which will not have any effect on price or quality of the goods and services offered, can be accepted for evaluation purposes without a price adjustment. Other deviations which may affect the direct and/or indirect cost to the Executing Agency if it accepted the bid should be expressed in monetary terms and added to the bid price for purposes of evaluation. All price adjustments should be made by the Executing Agency and its consultants without any consultations with the bidder regarding the justification for the amount of the adjustment. (a) 2.40 17 Adjustment for Completeness in Scope of Supply The cost of minor omissions or missing items in the scope of supply, services, etc. should be added to the bid price to allow for bid comparison on an equal basis. The price adjustment should be based on a reasonable estimate of the cost by the Executing Agency, consultant, or bid evaluation committee, taking into consideration the corresponding quoted prices from other conforming bids. The price adjustment should be based on the fair price of the omitted item. However, use of the highest quoted price for the same items by the other responsive bidders is the option most frequently taken by executing agencies, and is acceptable. ADB usually finances direct and indirect foreign currency, and sometimes part of the local expenditure components of the civil works contract by applying estimated percentages. The taxes are usually not included in the portion financed by ADB. BID EVALUATION PROCEDURE (b) Adjustment for Technical Compliance 2.41 Similarly, a minor deficiency in technical compliance should not be a cause for rejection of the bid. An example of a minor deficiency would be a bid to supply vehicles that offers cross-ply tires instead of the specified radial-ply tires. An item in a supply schedule or bill of materials that is ineligible because it is produced in a nonmember country of ADB, and which is considered a minor deviation, is similarly not cause for rejection of the bid.18 The cost of making good any deficiency, including replacing ineligible items with eligible ones, should be added to the bid price concerned. The price adjustment should be estimated as stated in Clause 2.40 above. Rectification in the awarded contract of minor deficiencies, including replacement of non-compliant, missing, or ineligible items is explained in Section 2, para. 3.4. (c) 2.42 Adjustment for Specified Technical Evaluation Factors For energy consuming equipment and facilities, adjustment for efficiency over and above the minimum functional guarantees specified (e.g., generators, pumps), losses (e.g., transformers), and future operating costs of the equipment may be taken into account in determining the evaluated bid price. The financial cost of these adjustments (added to or deducted from the bid price as the case may be) shall be made only when it is specified in the bidding document that these functional guarantees and projected operating costs are factors in bid evaluation. The methods of calculation of these evaluation factors shall be clearly specified in the bidding document. No deviation from the specified manner of cost calculation should be introduced. (d) Adjustment for Spare Parts 2.43 Only those spare parts and tools which are specified by the executing agency on an itemwise basis in the scope of supply shall be taken into account in the bid evaluation. Suppliers’ recommended spare parts for a specified operating requirement should not be considered in bid evaluation. (e) Adjustment for Cost of Inland Transportation to the Project Site 2.44 If bidders are required to include the cost for local handling and inland transportation from the port-ofentry or warehouse/EXW to the project site and fail to include such cost in their bids, the cost for local handling and inland transportation may be estimated, based on prevailing rates, and added to the bid price. 2.45 If the bid calls for the supply of goods on CIF or EXW basis only; but the cost of local handling and inland transportation is going to be considered for bid comparison purposes, then the cost of local handling and inland transportation should be calculated in the manner specified in the bidding documents and added to all the bid prices for comparison purposes only. 18 Except as otherwise determined by ADB as specified in the financing agreement, all goods and related services supplied under ADB-financed and administered contracts shall have as their country of origin an eligible country of ADB, irrespective of their value. Country of Origin is the country where the goods have been mined, grown, cultivated, produced, manufactured, or processed; or through manufacture, processing, or assembly, another commercially recognized article results that differs substantially in its basic characteristics from its imported components. It is the country of origin that determines eligibility, not the nationality of the firm that produces, assembles, distributes, or sells the goods. In determining if the inclusion of ineligible item(s) in a bid constitutes a minor or major deviation, the value of the item(s) would normally be the determining factor (refer to para 2.10 (b)). 17 18 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION (f) Maximum Amount of Adjustment for Deviations 2.46 In some cases, bids contain so many deviations requiring adjustments to the bid price such that the total value of all adjustments constitutes a large percentage of the bid price. In such cases, each deviation by itself may be considered minor but both the number of deviations and their total value make it necessary to consider the bid nonresponsive as a whole. In other instances, adjustments for only one or a few deviations have a relatively high monetary value, as would be the case with deviations regarding retention money or liquidated damages. It is, therefore, useful to adopt a percentage of the bid price as the maximum amount of adjustments which can be made without considering the bid nonresponsive. Fifteen percent of the bid price is considered an appropriate limit for the total monetary value of all adjustments to the bid price; if the total exceeds 15% of the bid price, the bid may be rejected as nonresponsive. 2.47 If such a limit on adjustments is adopted, an adjustment for more than one commercial deviation, such as the provisions for retention money and liquidated damages, may be large enough to require rejection of the bid. If the bid contains several deviations, it is useful to review what major adjustments will be necessary before calculating all other adjustments. Such review may show that the total adjustments would exceed the limit, in which event, the bid can be rejected before carrying out a more detailed price evaluation. 6. Detailed Evaluation of Bids for a Civil Works Contract 2.48 Detailed evaluation of bids for a civil works contract is similar in substance, procedure, and format to those for supply contracts. The major difference is that the detailed evaluation includes, in the case of civil works contracts, analysis of unit rates, and proposed equipment and staffing, which are normally not needed in the evaluation of bids for supply contracts. (a) 2.49 Analysis of Bill of Quantities and Unit Rates The analysis of prices for components of the bill of quantities and for unit rates of a bid is carried out for the following purposes: (i) To verify whether the bill of quantities is complete. The ADB standard bidding documents for the procurement of works provide that the cost of items against which the bidder has failed to enter a rate or price shall be deemed to be covered by other rates and prices entered in the bill of quantities. Accordingly, there should be no adjustments for missing items in the bill of quantities unless the bidding document specify otherwise. If, however, a bidder does not quote a price for one entire bill, price adjustment should be made for the missing bill for bid evaluation purposes, unless the missing bill is for a major component of the works, in which case, the bid should be rejected. (ii) To verify whether the bid price is reasonable. An unreasonably low bid price may reflect the bidder’s misunderstanding of the specifications and, accordingly, this bidder may incur substantial financial losses and fail to complete the work satisfactorily if awarded the contract. To determine the reasonableness of a bid price, it is necessary to consider all circumstances affecting the bid. A bid should not be rejected, however, solely because the bid price exceeds or is lower by a certain percentage of the estimate. (iii) To examine whether the unit rates of the bid are balanced. A bid is considered unbalanced if the unit rates in relation to the estimate and the rates quoted by other bidders are substantially higher for certain items of work, and lower for others. This becomes an issue when the items with substantially higher rates are those to be performed early in the contract or for possibly underestimated quantities. Details of unbalanced bids are further discussed in (b) below. BID EVALUATION PROCEDURE (iv) To examine the completeness of unit rates. Where bidding documents require the bidder to provide drawings and/or a breakdown of the price of any bid item in support of its unit rate or price for that item, any component that is missing from the drawings and/or the breakdown of the price of a bid item shall be loaded during evaluation for the price of the missing component. This adjustment, however, needs to be specifically provided in the bidding document. (b) Unbalanced Bids 2.50 An unbalanced bid can be identified when a Table of Comparison of Major Items of Work is prepared, which compares unit prices quoted by bidders with the Executing Agency’s estimate. Unbalanced bids can usually be classified into two main cases as follows. (i) Higher unit prices for earlier works In this case, a bidder may purposely quote high unit prices for those work elements to be performed early in the contract period so as to increase the early payments. The same situation can arise in some supply, delivery, and installation contracts. This results in a higher cost for the Executing Agency (i.e., interest on early payment) and more importantly, the incentives for the contractor to complete the works are considerably reduced since the payments the contractor will receive during later phases of the contract may be smaller than the actual costs. Generally, the bid should not be rejected unless extremely unbalanced. Instead, if a bid is substantially unbalanced, i.e., where unit prices quoted for the items involved are, say, 50% higher than the average quoted by other bidders for the same items, and where the total amount involved exceeds between 1% and 5 % of the total bid depending on the size of the contract, a higher performance security19 for the contractor could be required to protect the Executing Agency against financial loss in the event of default of the successful bidder. (ii) Higher unit rates for underestimated work items In this second case, a bidder who has reason to believe that the quantities given in the Bill of Quantities for one or more work items are underestimated will quote unduly high prices for those items. In most civil works contracts, both the contractor and the Executing Agency are protected from such technical errors by incorporating the provision that a new unit price will be negotiated if • the actual measured quantity of work executed for the item exceeds or falls short of the quantity set out in the Bill of Quantities by more than 25%; or • the change in quantity results in the increase of the total amount for any item by more than 2%20 of the contract price. If such provision is not included in the bidding document,21 then at the time of contract finalization, agreement should be reached to include the above provision as part of the particular conditions of contract, rather than rejecting the bid. The FIDIC-recommended 0.25% level as provided in GCC 12.3 may be negotiated to the 2% level, depending on the Executing Agency’s assessment of the winning bidder’s price deviation from the average price of other bidders as a reflection of the market price for the item. 19 20 21 As provided in instructions to bidders of standard bidding documents for procurement of works and plant. FIDIC Conditions of Contract for Construction (MDB Harmonized Ed. 2010) GCC 12.3 (a) (ii) provides that a 0.25% change may already trigger a price negotiation. FIDIC Conditions of Contract for Construction GCC 12.3. 19 20 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION (c) 2.51 Provisional Sums for Contingencies Provisional Sums for Contingencies are budgetary items only, and are not bid competitively. They may be a fixed amount, or a percentage of the bid price as a whole or of the bid price of specific bills of the bill of quantities as specified in the bidding document. As contingencies are not bid competitively, they must be excluded for evaluation purposes. (d) Provisional Sums for Dayworks 2.52 These are commonly found in contracts where the likely incidence of unforeseen works cannot be covered by definitive descriptions and estimated quantities in the bill of quantities. Dayworks are works carried out as directed by the appropriate authority stipulated in the bidding document. They are paid for on the basis of the time spent and the resources employed by the contractor comprising workers, materials, and equipment at unit rates quoted in the bid. Dayworks shall be included for bid evaluation purposes only if priced competitively. To be priced competitively, the Executing Agency must provide nominal quantities for each item in the daywork schedule and bidders shall quote both unit rates and the products of the nominal quantities and unit rates for each item. The total of the daywork schedule is then included in the bid price for evaluation purposes. If nominal quantities are not specified by the Executing Agency or the unit rates are not priced competitively, dayworks shall be excluded for evaluation purposes. (e) 2.53 Other Provisional Sums Other Provisional Sums are sometimes included by the Executing Agency in schedules of the bill of quantities to cover services to be provided by the bidder that cannot be accurately described or quantified in the bill of quantities. Payment to the bidder is usually made by the Executing Agency against receipts supplied by the bidder for the services supplied, normally with an additional specified percentage for use of the bidder’s funds. As the provisional sums are stipulated in the bill of quantities by the Executing Agency, they are not priced competitively and shall be excluded for evaluation purposes. (f) Clarifications, Correspondence, and Meetings 2.54 In many large civil works contracts, the Executing Agency may decide to meet with all, or the lowest, bidders who are selected for detailed evaluation, in order to clarify their bids. Details of pricing, work methods, scheduling, and sourcing of materials are usually the principal subjects of such bid clarification meetings that provide additional information for consideration in bid evaluation. Since the information provided by bidders in such meetings often form the basis of conclusions of the Executing Agency, the minutes of the meetings should be recorded and attached to the bid evaluation report for the consideration of ADB and any other approving authority of the Borrower in reviewing the findings and recommendations of the Executing Agency. 7. Application of Domestic Preference Scheme22 2.55 Preference for domestic goods will be offered to all borrowing ADB countries. The scheme provides that domestically manufactured goods will be eligible for preference in comparison with imported goods. This eligibility is determined, not with reference to the nationality of the bidder but with reference to domestic 22 If domestic preference is allowed in the procurement plan and the bidding document, the scheme grants a margin of preference, subject to conditions, in favor of domestically manufactured goods and domestic contractors and may be applied in the evaluation of bids under International Competitive Bidding as provided in the Guidelines or under Open Competitive Bidding as provided in the Regulations. BID EVALUATION PROCEDURE goods. Therefore, the preference is given not to the domestic bidder but to the locally manufactured goods. The nationality of the bidder or manufacturer is irrelevant. Bidders are required to certify, as part of their bid, the existence of the manufacturing facilities where local value is to be added. The margin of preference for domestic goods is specified in the bidding document and limited to 15% of the CIF or CIP price of the imported goods. 2.56 Preference for domestic contractors for civil works is limited to civil works in certain borrowing countries. Domestic contractors and joint ventures must meet certain minimum criteria for eligibility under the domestic preference scheme. The margin of preference is specified in the bidding document and limited to 7.5% of the bid price. 2.57 Domestic preference for both supply of goods, civil works, and plant will be applied only if it is specified in the procurement plan approved by ADB. The bidding document provides and specifies the manner in which the preference scheme will be applied in bid comparison. 2.58 The specific methods of application of domestic preference are provided in the User’s Guides of each standard bidding document issued by ADB. 8. The Lowest Evaluated Substantially Responsive Bid 2.59 The result of the detailed evaluation of price bids shall be summarized in the expanded Table of Bid Prices and, if used, the Table of Bid Price Adjustments. The tables shall indicate the bid currencies and components of price schedules, arithmetic corrections, currency conversions for comparison, and price adjustments, all determined in accordance with the bidding documents. The table should provide a clear basis for declaring the lowest evaluated bid. After going through the above three steps, the lowest evaluated substantially responsive bid is determined in accordance with the provisions of the bidding documents. If, however, bids were invited for multiple contracts, then the determination of the lowest evaluated substantially responsive bidder for each contract shall have to undergo multiple contract evaluation as provided in the bidding document (see para. 2.64 below). 9. Abnormally Low Bids 2.60 For procurements under projects covered by the Procurement Regulations for ADB Borrowers: Goods, Works, Nonconsulting and Consulting Services (2017, as amended from time to time) or utilizing bidding documents based on 2018 SBDs issued by ADB, a final step after comparison of bid prices but before making award recommendations is to determine whether the lowest evaluated bid may be considered an abnormally low bid (ALB), which is one where the bid price, in combination with other elements of the bid, appears to be so low that it raises concerns as to the capability of the bidder to perform the contract for the offered bid price. The Purchaser or Employer shall be guided by the procedures and courses of action described in the issued bidding document after establishing ALB. For detailed guidance on how to determine if a bid is abnormally low, Executing Agencies should refer to the Abnormally Low Bids: Guidance Note on Procurement (2018) published by ADB. 21 22 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION D.Step 4: Confirmation of Qualifications and Recommendation for Contract Award 2.61 As a final step prior to award, the Executing Agency should always ensure that the bidder whose bid has been evaluated as the lowest evaluated substantially responsive bid has the financial and technical capability or qualifications to execute the contract satisfactorily. If this is established, the contract shall be awarded to the bidder who submitted the lowest evaluated substantially responsive bid. 1. Evaluation of Qualifications23 2.62 In order to determine the capability of Bidders to implement the contract satisfactorily, critical aspects of their financial and technical capabilities necessary to perform the contract need to be examined. All these criteria and their specific requirements stipulated in the bidding document shall be evaluated on a pass/ fail basis against the documentation and other evidences provided by Bidders together with their technical bids. If a separate prequalification procedure has been undertaken previously for the same contract, this step may be waived. However, if more than a year has lapsed since the prequalification results were approved, the Executing Agency has the right to review bidder qualifications, including the right to require submission of the latest financial records and completion certificates. 2.63 The Table of Evaluation of Bidder’s Qualifications (see Appendix 8 for a sample) should list all the qualifications requirements for both financial and technical criteria specified in the bidding document against which the evidences or documents submitted by bidders are compared to determine whether each bidder meets the requirements and passes, or does not meet and, therefore, fails. Failure in any of the financial and technical experience criteria leads to rejection of a bid. 2. Multiple Contract Evaluation 2.65 If bids were invited for a number of contracts (or lots), and bidders were allowed to quote prices for different contracts and be eligible for award of multiple contracts, the final bid price comparison to determine the bidders to be recommended for contract award shall be based on the methodology described in the bidding document. The objective is to arrive at the least cost combination of contract prices for executing agencies by taking into account discounts offered for multiple awards, if any, as well the capacity of bidders to undertake multiple contracts. The key assumption is that the different contracts are intended to be implemented simultaneously, thus requiring re-assessment of qualifications in terms of average annual turnover, financial resources, personnel and equipment aggregated from requirements of individual contracts. Flexibility in assessment of aggregation may be applied where personnel and equipment can be shared between individual contracts such that they can still be implemented simultaneously and on time. 2.66 In order to present the evaluation details, , the Table of Bid Prices or Table of Bid Price Adjustments may not be adequate. In such case, additional tables may be needed for the multiple contract evaluation. 3. Award of Contract 2.67 If the lowest evaluated Bidder is determined to have passed the qualification criteria, the contract shall be awarded to this Bidder or bidders in case of multiple contract bidding. Such bidder or bidders must 23 Under the Single-Stage: Two Envelope, Two-Stage, and Two-Stage: Two-Envelope bidding procedures, the evaluation of qualifications of bidders are normally conducted after the examination of technical bids. BID EVALUATION PROCEDURE not be required, as a condition of contract award, to undertake responsibilities or works not stipulated in the bidding document or to modify the bid. However, even as the lowest evaluated bidder has been determined, there may still be a need for the Executing Agency to have a contract finalization meeting particularly for works or plant contracts—not to change anything in the bidder’s proposal as required by the bidding document and as evaluated—but to agree on some other additional conditions. These may include a higher performance security for unbalanced bids, the substantiation of undertakings for provision of personnel and certain equipment if Letters of Undertaking were allowed by the Executing Agency in place of actual names or specific items of equipment at the time of bid submission, and adjustments to certain contract conditions not considered during bid evaluation, e.g., factors and weights for price adjustment, and the percentage cited in paragraph 2.50(ii) above for GCC 12.3. 2.68 For procurements under projects covered by the Regulations and utilizing bidding documents based on 2018 SBDs, after notification of award of contract by the Purchaser or Employer, a Standstill Period may apply if provided in the bidding document. The standstill period is a certain duration before making the actual contract award within which any unsuccessful bidder can challenge the proposed award. The Purchaser or Employer shall be prepared to promptly respond in writing and/or in a debriefing meeting to any unsuccessful Bidder who requests a debriefing as provided in the bidding document. 23 24 Section 3: Preparation of Bid Evaluation Report A. Single-Stage: Single-Envelope Bidding Procedure 3.1 The Bid Evaluation Report should include such information and documentation to establish to the satisfaction of ADB that the results of the evaluation are consistent with the procurement arrangements provided in the financing agreement, and the methods and procedures indicated in the procurement plan. When so established, it may be concluded that the bidding, the bid evaluation process, and the proposed award of contract abide by the principles embodied in the Guidelines or the Regulations. These principles are as follows: (i) goods, works, and services are sourced from eligible member countries of ADB; (ii) the transparency of the bidding process has provided adequate, fair, and equal opportunity to manufacturers, suppliers, and contractors from all the eligible member countries of ADB; (iii) the principle of “economy and efficiency” has been applied in the bidding and in the bid evaluation process by establishing the lowest evaluated substantially responsive bid. 3.2 24 The Guidelines/Regulations requires that an Executing Agency shall prepare a detailed report on the evaluation and comparison of bids providing the specific reasons and circumstances upon which the recommendation is based for the award of the contract. The information and documentation to be submitted as part of, or with, the Evaluation Report for the procurement of a goods contract, for example, should include the following: (a) Basic Data Sheet and summary of the procurement; (b) a photocopy of the Invitation for Bids advertised in an English language local newspaper of wide circulation;24 (c) the Record of Bid Opening including the attendance sheet with signatures of the representatives of bidders; (d) Table of Bid Prices including arithmetic error corrections and discounts offered as submitted—if arithmetic error corrections are involved, evidence that corrections for arithmetic errors have been accepted by the bidders concerned should be attached. For simple contracts and those with limited scope, this table should suffice but may include the financial adjustments for both commercial terms and conditions and for technical requirements, to show the total evaluated prices for all bids concerned; (e) Table of Substantial Responsiveness to major commercial terms and conditions, and corresponding Table of Salient Features, if utilized; For international competitive bidding or open competitive bidding with international advertisement procedures. Otherwise, whatever advertising medium was utilized. Section 3: PREPARATION Preparation OF of BID Bid EVALUATION Evaluation Report REPORT (f) Table of Substantial Responsiveness to key provisions of the technical requirements and specifications, and corresponding Table of Salient Features, if utilized; (h) Table of Bid Price Adjustments, if utilized, with respect to salient features of the bids requiring price adjustments. The table will show for each bid the adjustments made to the bid prices for deviations with references to the clauses in the bidding documents on which they are based, and indicating the methods used in computing the adjustments; (g) Table of Evaluation of Bidder’s Qualifications; (i) Table of Bid Price Comparison, if utilized for more complex or larger scope contracts, showing all bids selected for detailed evaluation, the financial adjustments for commercial terms and conditions, the financial adjustments for technical requirements to obtain the total evaluated prices for all bids concerned, the adjustments due to the application of domestic preference, and the results of multiple contract evaluation; (j) copies of correspondence with bidders relating to clarifications of their bids; (k) recommendation for award of contract; (l) draft contract or a draft letter of acceptance if such draft differs substantially from the draft previously submitted to, and approved by ADB; and (m) certificate of eligibility if required by ADB (pursuant to its Asian Development Fund requirements). For other bidding procedures, the Evaluation Report shall include their equivalent documents as presented in the Appendixes and the examples in Part II of this Guide. 3.3 The evaluation report should include a narrative section in which information not suitable for presentation in the form of tables is presented, together with any supplementary explanations and information necessary for a complete understanding of all the factors considered during bid evaluation. In particular, the reasons for rejection of bids which are considered nonresponsive to the bidding document should be fully explained and justified in the narrative section. Similarly, the basis for adjustments in the bid prices should be adequately explained and, where appropriate, cross references made to the relevant provisions in the bidding documents. Ultimately, the report must demonstrate and fully substantiate a clear understanding of the rationale for the recommendation for contract award. 3.4 The recommended amount for award of contract should be the bid price submitted by the bidder as corrected for arithmetic errors, with discounts applied if offered, and the additional amount to make good any minor deviations in the scope of supply or technical compliance. This recommended additional amount may be based on the evaluated price adjustments or the agency estimates for the items with minor deviations.25 In proposing the additional amount, the Executing Agency should note the following: (i) 25 the cost of making good the minor deviations should be included in the contract amount, provided that this cost does not involve new items that would constitute a violation of Clause 2.59 of the Guidelines or Para. 90 of the Regulations, i.e., that “a bidder shall not be required, as a condition of award, to undertake responsibilities for work not stipulated in the bidding documents or otherwise to modify the bid as originally submitted;” and Note that deviations are declared “minor” because their costs “to be made good” can be estimated and are less than 10% of the bid price. 25 26 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION (ii) the final contract amount agreed between the Executing Agency and the successful bidder should not exceed the bid price (as corrected for arithmetical errors, with discounts applied if offered, and the amount to make good any minor deviations in the scope of supply and technical compliance) of the second lowest evaluated substantially responsive bidder. The final additional amount to be included in the contract shall be agreed between the Executing Agency and the successful bidder during contract finalization. The Executing Agency’s strategy to address any minor deviations should take into account the possibility of the bidder’s refusal to rectify its bid as originally submitted, and should therefore also propose any additional measures. 3.5 Any report and recommendation of the consultant (if such consultant is funded under an ADB technical assistance or loan and engaged for the implementation of the project) should also be sent to ADB. If the Executing Agency and its consultants reach different conclusions and views regarding any matter affecting the selection of the lowest evaluated substantially responsive bid, such differences should be fully explained in the body of the report. 3.6 Complaints and representations received shall also be included in the report, including the actions taken by the Executing Agency in resolving them. 3.7 The bid evaluation report and recommendation for contract award should be sent to ADB as early as possible. For contracts subject to ADB’s prior review, the Executing Agency should furnish to ADB, at least 4 weeks prior to expiration of bid validity, three copies of the complete bid evaluation report together with a covering letter. This is necessary to enable ADB to review thoroughly the report and recommendation in order to obtain the necessary formal approval within ADB for transmission to the Executing Agency. 3.8 For contracts under post review (sampling), the executing agency should furnish to ADB, three copies of the complete bid evaluation report together with a covering letter upon award of contract or as otherwise specified in the financing agreement. B. Single-Stage: Two-Envelope Bidding Procedure 3.9 Two bid evaluation reports are prepared for the Single-Stage: Two-Envelope bidding procedure: the Technical Bid Evaluation Report and the Financial (or Price) Bid Evaluation Report, and the list of information items above are separated into technical evaluation documents and price evaluation documents. When technical deviations and omissions require price adjustments, these need to be covered in both reports and checked for consistency between the reports. 3.10 The contents of these reports may be derived from the Appendixes and the sample reports in Part II of this Guide. C. Two-Stage and Two-Stage: Two-Envelope Bidding Procedures 3.11 For these procedures, the first stage report is of mainly technical nature while also covering qualifications evaluation where no prequalification has been conducted. The second stage report, however, is similar in format to the Single-Stage: One-Envelope procedure report as it covers the evaluation of both the final technical bid and the price bid. 3.12 The contents of these reports may be derived from the Appendixes and the sample reports in Part II of this Guide. 27 Appendixes 28 Appendix 1 Basic Data Sheet 1. Project Name: 2. Project Financing Approval/Loan Number: Approval Date: Closing Date: 3. Bid Package or Contract Name: Bid Package or Contract Number: Bid Package with Lots (Yes or No): 4. Procurement Plan Date: Prequalification (Yes or No): Estimated Value or Engineer’s Estimate: Estimated Contact Duration (mos.): 5. ADB Approval of Bidding Documents: 6. Dates Invitation for Bids Issued: Newspaper of General Circulation: ADB website: 7. Procurement Details Method:1 Contract Type:2 Bidding Document: Bidding Procedure:3 Application of Domestic Preference (Yes or No): Pre-Bid Meeting: Site Visit: 8. Bid Submission Date and Time: Extension: Bidding Document Addendum Issued: 9. Bid Opening Date and Time: Number of Bids Received: Appendix 1 10. EA Submission of BER to ADB: 11. Bid Validity Expiration Date: No. of Extensions: Final Expiration Date:4 No. of Bidders Extended Validity: 12. Bid Securing Declaration: 13. Bid Security Requirement: Original Expiration Date: Final Expiration Date:4 14. Bid Evaluation Currency: Date for Determining Applicable Exchange Rates:5 Exchange Rates for Evaluation:6 1 2 3 4 5 6 Procurement Guidelines methods (International Competitive Bidding (ICB). National Competitive Bidding (NCB), Limited International Bidding (LIB), Shopping (S) or methods under Procurement Regulations for ADB Borrowers (Open Competitive Bidding-International Advertisement, Open Competitive Bidding-National Advertisement) as appropriate. Goods, Works or Plant. 1S1E, 1S2E, 2S, 2S2E. Show the final date to which bidders were requested to extend the validity. The date as specified in the bidding documents shall be used. The official selling rates of all foreign currencies involved in the bid evaluation and their official sources as provided in the bidding documents shall be noted. 29 30 Appendix 2 Page 1 of 3 Record of Bid Opening LOAN NO.......................... PROJECT NAME .................................................................................................................................. BID NO................................ BID/CONTRACT NAME.................................................................................................................. 1. The following bids were received by the bid submission deadline set on ……………....(Date) .……. at ………….. (Time)………….hrs and were publicly opened and read at (Time)..….hrs on the same date. No. Name of Bidder and Address Bid Security Amount Bid Amount1 Contract No. 1 Contract No. 2 Etc.2 Total Remarks3 Signature of Bidder Representatives 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Etc. 1 2 3 Any discounts offered should be recorded. Any alternative bids submitted should be opened. Number of columns depends on the number of contracts/lots under a package. Indicate deficiencies in the letter of bid (no signature or no price) and bid security (smaller amount or shorter validity period), if applicable. Appendix 2 Page 2 of 3 2.The following bidders’ representatives attended the public opening of bids and a copy of the attendance sheet is attached as an annexure of this record. No. Name Designation Bidder Represented 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Etc. 3.Matters transpiring during the opening of bids. (Any modifications, bid withdrawals, complaints received, and clarifications mode or announced by the bid opening committee should be recorded). 4. Reading and signing of bids ended at ................. hrs. (Name, Signature, and Designation (Name, Signature, and Designation (Name, Signature, and Designation) 31 32 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION Page 3 of 3 Attendance Sheet for Opening of Bids LOAN NO ............. PROJECT NAME ............................................................................................................................ BID NO.................... BID/CONTRACT NAME ........................................................................................................... Place:.......................................................... Date:............................................... Time........................................... The following bidders’ representatives attended the public opening of bids. No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Etc. Bidder (Firm/JV/Agent) Representative (Printed Name) Designation Signature 33 Appendix 3(A) Table of Substantial Responsiveness of Bids (Commercial Terms)—Supply Contract No. Bidding Documents Reference Requirements Bidder No. 1 Bidder No. 2 Bidder No. 3 (Section and Clause No. (List here all conditions of bidding documents) stipulated in the bidding documents with which bidders must comply for their bids to be considered responsive) 1. Signature on Bid Form by the Authorized Person Section 1, Clause xx and Section 2, ITB yy C C C 2. Power of Attorney Section 1, Clause xx, Section 2, ITB yy C C C 3. Eligibility: Bidders Section 1, Clause 4 C (see details in Attachment 1 to this Appendix) C (see details in Attachment 1 to this Appendix) C (see details in Attachment 1 to this Appendix) Goods Section 1, Clause 5 C NC1 C 4. Bid Validity–60 days (Indicate here the date/ month/year) Section 1, Clause yy, Section 2, ITB xx C (valid until indicate here the date/month/ year) C (valid until indicate here the date/month/yr. C (valid until indicate here the date/month/ yr) 5. Bid Security (i) Amount >2% of the Bid Price Section 1, Clause 21.1, Section 2, ITB 21.1 C [indicate here the bid security amount] C [indicate here the bid security amount] C [indicate here the bid security amount] (ii) Validity–90 days (Indicate here the date/ month/year) Section 1, Clause xx Section 1, ITB yy C (valid until indicate here the date/month/ year) C (valid until indicate here the date/month/yr) C (valid until indicate here the date/mo/yr.) Goods are from non-member country of ADB No major deviation Nonresponsive Responsive Remarks No major deviation Findings Responsive Bid No. ..................................... C = Complied NC = Not Complied 1 for ................................................ (Bid/Contract/Title) ................................................ 34 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION Appendix 3(A) Attachment 1 Details on Eligibility of Bidders No. 1. Requirements Single Entity or Joint Venture If Joint Venture, all partners must be jointly and severally liable. 2. Bidder must be a national of an eligible ADB member country. Bidding Documents Reference Bidder No. 1 Bidder No. 2 Bidder No. 3 Section 1, Clause 4.1 Single Entity Joint Venture Single Entity Section 1, Clause 4.2 X X and XX X XX (member countries) XXX (member (countries) X (member countries) Proposed subcontractors or suppliers must be nationals of an eligible ADB member country. Partners are Jointly and severally liable 3. Conflict of Interest Section 1, Clause 4.3 None Yes, (indicate why) None 4. Declared ineligible by ADB Section 1, Clause 4.4 No No No 5. Government-owned enterprise in Purchaser’s country to be legally and financially autonomous, operate under commercial law, and not dependent agency of the Purchaser Section 1, Clause 4.5 Not a government owned enterprise Not a government owned enterprise Not a government owned enterprise. 6. Not having been declared ineligible based on a United Nations resolution Section 1, Clause 4.7 Not declared ineligible Not declared ineligible. Not declared ineligible. Appendix 3(B) Appendix 3(B) Table of Substantial Responsiveness of Bids (Commercial Terms)—Civil Works Bid No. ................................ for ............................................... (Bid/Contract/Title) ....................................................................... No. Requirements Bidding Documents Reference (List here all conditions stipulated in the bidding documents with which bidders must comply for their bids to be considered responsive) (Section and Clause No. of bidding documents issued) 1. Signature on Bid Form by the Authorized Person 2. Power of Attorney 3. Eligibility: 4. 5. Bidder No. 1 Bidder No. 2 Bidder No. 3 Section 1, Clause 20.2, Section 2, ITB 20.2 C C C Section 1, Clause 20.2 Section 2, ITB 20.2 C C C Bidders Section 1, Clause 4 C (see details C (see details in C (see details in Attachment Attachment 1 to in Attachment 1 to this this Appendix) 1 to this Appendix) Appendix) C C C Materials, Equipment and Services Origin Section 1, Clause 5 Bid Validity–90 days (Indicate here the date/ month/year) Section 1, Clause 18.1, Section 2, ITB 18.1 Bid Security (i) Amount : $200,000.00 (ii) Validity–118 days (iii) (Indicate here the date/ month/year) Section 1, Clause 19.1, Section 2, ITB 19.1 C [indicate here the bid security amount] Section 1, Clause 19.3 Section 2, ITB 19.3 C (valid until indicate here the date/ month/year) C (valid until indicate here the date/ month/year) C (valid until indicate here the date/month/yr. C [indicate here the bid security amount] NC (Bid Security is valid for only 100 days) C (valid until indicate here the date/ month/yr) C [indicate here the bid security amount] C (valid until indicate here the date/ month/yr.) Remarks No major deviation Major Deviation on Bid Security No major deviation Findings Responsive Nonresponsive Responsive C = Complied NC = Not Complied 35 36 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION Appendix 3(B) Attachment 1 Details on Eligibility of Bidders No. 1. Requirements Single Entity or Joint Venture If Joint Venture, all partners must be jointly and severally liable. 2. Bidder must be a national of an eligible ADB member country. Bidding Documents Reference Bidder No. 1 Bidder No. 2 Bidder No. 3 Section 1, Clause 4.1 Single Entity Joint Venture Single Entity Section 1, Clause 4.2 X X and XX X XX (member country) XXX (member country) X (member country) Proposed subcontractors or suppliers must be nationals of an eligible ADB member country. Partners are jointly and severally liable 3. Conflict of Interest Section 1, Clause 4.3 None None None 4. Declared ineligible by ADB Section 1, Clause 4.4 No No No 5. Government-owned enterprise in Purchaser’s country to be legally and financially autonomous, operate under commercial law, and not dependent agency of the Purchaser Section 1, Clause 4.5 Not a government owned enterprise Not a government owned enterprise Not a government owned enterprise 6. Not having been declared ineligible based on a United Nations resolution Section 1, Clause 4.7 Not declared ineligible Not declared ineligible Not declared ineligible Appendix 3(C) Appendix 3(C) Table of Substantial Responsiveness of Bids (Commercial Terms)—Plant Design–Supply– Installation Bid No. ................................ for ............................................... (Bid/Contract/Title) ....................................................................... No. Requirements Bidding Documents Reference (List here all conditions stipulated in the bidding documents with which bidders must comply for their bids to be considered responsive) (Section and Clause No. of bidding documents) 1. Signature on Bid Form by the Authorized Person 2. Power of Attorney 3. Eligibility: 4. 5. Bidder No. 1 Bidder No. 2 Bidder No. 3 Section 1, Clause xx, Section 2, ITB yy C C C Section 1, Clause xx Section 2, ITB yy C C C Bidders Section 1, Clause 4 C (see details in Attachment 1 to this Appendix) C (see details in Attachment 1 to this Appendix) C (see details in Attachment 1 to this Appendix) Plant and Services Origin Section 1, Clause 5 Bid Validity–90 days (Indicate here the date/month/ year) Section 1, Clause xx Section 2, ITB yy C C C Bid Security (i) Amount : $300,000.00 Section 1, Clause xx Section 2, ITB yy (ii) Validity–118 days (Indicate here the date/month/ year) Section 1, Clause xx Section 2, ITB yy C (valid until C (valid until C (valid until indicate here the indicate here the indicate here the date/month/ date/month/yr. date/month/ year) yr) C [indicate here the bid security amount] NC (Bid Security amount is $250,000.00) C [indicate here the bid security amount] C (valid until C (valid until indicate here the C (valid until indicate here the date/month/ indicate here the date/month/ year) date/month/ yr.) year) Remarks No major deviation Major Deviation on Bid Security No major deviation Findings Responsive Nonresponsive Responsive C = Complied NC = Not Complied 37 38 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION Appendix 3(C) Attachment 1 Details on Eligibility of Bidders No. 1. Requirements Single Entity or Joint Venture If Joint Venture, all partners must be jointly and severally liable. 2. Bidder must be a national of an eligible ADB member country. Bidding Documents Reference Bidder No. 1 Bidder No. 2 Bidder No. 3 Section 1, Clause 4.1 Single Entity Joint Venture Single Entity Section 1, Clause 4.2 X X and XX X XX (member country) XXX (member country) X (member country) Proposed subcontractors or suppliers must be nationals of an eligible ADB member country. Partners are Jointly and severally liable 3. Conflict of Interest Section 1, Clause 4.3 None None None 4. Declared ineligible by ADB Section 1, Clause 4.4 No No No 5. Government-owned enterprise in Purchaser’s country to be legally and financially autonomous, operate under commercial law, and not dependent agency of the Purchaser Section 1, Clause 4.5 Not a government owned enterprise Not a government owned enterprise Not a government owned enterprise 6. Not having been declared ineligible based on a United Nations resolution Section 1, Clause 4.7 Not declared ineligible Not declared ineligible Not declared ineligible Appendix 4 Appendix 4 Table of Substantial Responsiveness of Bids (Technical Requirements)—Supply Contract Bid No. ................................ for ............................................... (Bid/Contract/Title) ....................................................................... No. Requirements Bidding Documents Reference Bidder No. l Bidder No. 2 C C (List here the scope of supply and all key technical and performance requirements of major equipment and materials: e.g. plant, capacity, horsepower, pressure, voltage, efficiency, operating temperature etc.) (Section and Clause No. of bidding document issued) 1. Scope of Supply Section 6 and Schedules 2. Item 1. Grader 85 kW C C 3. Item 2. 8.5 m3 capacity dump truck. left-hand drive C NC* 4. Item 3. Bulldozer. Min. 225 kW C (230 kW) C (225 kW) 5. Etc. Remarks No major deviation. *Right-hand drive and 7 m3 capacity Findings Responsive Nonresponsive C = Complied NC = Not Compiled Bidder No. 3 39 40 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION Appendix 5(A) Table of Salient Features of Bids (Commercial Terms and Conditions)— Supply Contract Bid No. ................................ for ............................................... (Bid/Contract/Title) ....................................................................... No. 1. Specified Terms and Conditions Bidding Documents Reference Bidder No. 1 Bidder No. 2 Bidder No. 3 (List here all major commercial terms and conditions specified in the bidding document; e.g., performance security, terms of payment, Delivery and Completion Period) (Section and Clause No. of bidding documents) C C C C C C Section 6, Item 2 C NC1 C Section 8, GCC 16.1 C C NC2 Performance Security (i) A mount: 10% of the Contract Price Section 7, Clause 18.1; Section 8, GCC 18.1 (ii) V alid up to the date of completion of the Supplier’s performance obligations, including any warranty obligations. Section 7, Clause 18.4 Section 8, GCC 18.4 2. Delivery/Contract Completion Period: 10 months 3. Terms of Payment continued on next page Appendix 5(A) Table continued No. Specified Terms and Conditions Remarks C = Complied NC = Not Complied Bidding Documents Reference Bidder No. 1 Bidder No. 2 Bidder No. 3 For purposes 2 For purposes of bid of bid evaluation, evaluation, Bid Price shall Bid Price shall be adjusted be adjusted upwards upwards pursuant to pursuant to the provision the provision in Criterion in Criterion 4.2, Section 4.1, Section 3: Evaluation 3: Evaluation and and Qualification Qualification Criteria of Criteria of the Bidding the Bidding Document. Document. 1 41 42 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION Appendix 5(B) Table of Salient Feature of Bids (Commercial Terms and Conditions)— Civil Works Bid No. ................................ for ............................................... (Bid/Contract/Title) ....................................................................... No. 1. 2. Specified Terms and Conditions Bidding Documents Reference (List here all major commercial terms and conditions specified in the bidding document; e.g., performance security, terms of payment, Delivery and Completion Period) (Section and Clause No. of bidding documents) Bidder No. 1 Bidder No. 2 Bidder No. 3 Performance Security (i) A mount: 10% of the Contract Price Section 8: Particular Conditions of Contract, Part A: Ref. GCC 4.2 C C C (ii) V alid up to the issue of the Performance Certificate Section 7: General Conditions of Contract, Sub-Clause 4.2 C C C Contract Completion Time (24 months) Section 8: Particular Conditions of Contract, Part A, Ref: GCC 1.1.3.3 C NC1 (30 months) C Remarks C = Complied NC = Not Complied 1 Bid declared nonresponsive as ITB 13.2 in Section 2 stipulates that alternative time for completion is not permitted. Appendix 5(C) Appendix 5(C) Table of Salient Feature of Bids (Commercial Terms and Conditions— Plant Design–Supply–Installation) Bid No. ................................ for ............................................... (Bid/Contract/Title) ....................................................................... No. 1. 2. Specified Terms and Conditions Bidding Documents Reference (List here all major commercial terms and conditions specified in the bidding document; e.g., performance security, terms of payment, Delivery and Completion Period) (Section and Clause No. of bidding documents) Bidder No. 1 Bidder No. 2 Bidder No. 3 C C C C C C NC1 (40 months) C C For purposes of bid evaluation, the Bid Price shall be adjusted upwards pursuant to the provision in Criterion 1.3.2 of Section 3: Evaluation and Qualification Criteria of the Bidding Document. . Performance Security (i) Amount: 10% of the Contract Price Section 8, Clause 13.3.1 (ii) Valid up to the date of Operational Acceptance of the Facilities Section 7, Clause 13.3.3 Contract Completion Time: 36 months Remarks C = Complied NC = Not Complied Section 8, Clause 8.2 1 43 44 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION Appendix 5(A)-1 Table of Salient Features of Bids (Technical Requirements)—Supply Contract Bid No. ................................ for ............................................... (Bid/Contract/Title) ....................................................................... Specified Terms and Conditions Bidding Documents Reference [List here the scope of supply and all technical and performance features of equipment and materials in the scope] [Section and Clause No. of Bidding documents] No. Bidder No. 1 Bidder No. 2 1. Scope of Supply Section 6 and Supply Schedule C PC Failure to quote item 5, inland transportation 2. Pumps and Motors Section 6, C C Item 3: Technical Specifications [EA to give details from the Bidder’s Bid Proposal] (a) Pumps (centrifugal) (i) Capacity -lps (ii) Rating-kW (iii) Head-meter (iv) Efficiency, (v) Materials- Body Shaft Impeller (vi) Rpm etc. (b) Prime mover (i) Electric Motor (ii) Rating-kW (iii) Voltage (iv) Efficiency (v) Cooling system, etc. [EA to indicate the detailed requirements indicated in the attached Bidding Document.] C [EA to give details from the Bidder’s Bid Proposal] C Remarks No financial adjustment is required. Financial adjustment is required. C = Complied PC = Partially Complied NC = Not Complied Etc. Table of Bid Prices (Supply Contract) 1 Arithmetic Correction CIF/CIP/ EXW (2) Quoted Bid Price CIF/CIP/ EXW (1) Arithmetic Correction CIF/CIP/ EXW (2) Bidder No. 2 Corrected Discounts Bid Price Offered CIF/CIP/ CIF/CIP/ EXW EXW (4) = (1) ± (3) (2) - (3) Quoted Bid Price CIF/CIP/ EXW (1) Bidder No. 3 Corrected Arithmetic Discounts Bid Price Correction Offered CIF/CIP/ CIF/CIP/ CIF/CIP/ EXW EXW EXW (4) = (1) ± (2) (3) (2) - (3) If the contract is for supply, delivery, and installation, the bid price for local handling, transportation, and installation must be shown for each package and added to the sub-total for each package. Total for All Items Items in Schedule Schedule I 1 2 3 Sub-Total for I¹ II 1 2 3 Sub-Total for II¹ III 1 2 3 Sub-Total for III¹ Quoted Bid Price CIF/CIP/ EXW (1) Bidder No. 1 Corrected Discounts Bid Price Offered CIF/CIP/ CIF/CIP/ EXW EXW (4) = (1) ± (3) (2) - (3) Bid No. ................................ for ............................................... (Bid/Contract/Title) ........................................................................................................................................................ Appendix 6(A) Appendix 6(A) 45 Table of Bid Prices (Civil Works Contract) Mobilization Securities and Insurance Earthworks Piling and Foundation Concrete Works Metalworks Drainage Structures 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Total Title of Bill (or Item) Bill (or Item) No. Quoted Corrected Bid Arithmetic Discounts Bid Price Price Correction Offered (4) = (1) ± (1) (2) (3) (2) - (3) Bidder No. 1 Quoted Bid Arithmetic Discounts Price Correction Offered (1) (2) (3) Corrected Bid Price (4) = (1) ± (2) - (3) Bidder No. 2 Quoted Corrected Bid Arithmetic Discounts Bid Price Price Correction Offered (4) = (1) ± (1) (2) (3) (2) - (3) Bidder No. 3 Bid No. ................................ for ............................................... (Bid/Contract/Title) ........................................................................................................................................................ Appendix 6(B) 46 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION Table of Bid Prices (Plant Contracts) Plant (Including Mandatory Spare Parts) Supplied from Abroad Plant (Including Mandatory Spare Parts) Supplied from Within the Employer’s Country Design Services Installation and Other Services Grand Summary (Schedule Nos. 1 to 4) Bidder Recommended Spare Parts 2 3 4 5 6 Title of Schedule 1 Schedule No. Quoted Bid Price (1) Arithmetic Correction (2) Bidder No. 2 Bidder No. 3 Corrected Quoted ± Discounts Bid Price Bid Arithmetic Discounts Bid Price Quoted Arithmetic Discounts Offered (4) = (1) ± Price Correction Offered (4) = (1) ± Bid Price Correction Offered (3) (2) - (3) (1) (2) (3) (2) - (3) (1) (2) (3) Bidder No. 1 Bid No. ................................ for ............................................... (Bid/Contract/Title) ........................................................................................................................................................ Appendix 6(C) Corrected Bid Price (4) = (1) ± (2) - (3) Appendix 6(C) 47 48 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION Appendix 7(A) Table of Bid Price Adjustment (Supply Contract) (Refer to Table of Bid Prices) Bid No. ................................ for ............................................... (Bid/Contract/Title) ....................................................................... (Currency of Bid Comparison) Package No. I Particular Part A. (Supply and Installation of Pump Station No. 1) 1. Pumps 2. Motors 3. Pipes, Valves, and Fittings 4. Etc. CIF/EXW Inland Transportation Installation Sub-Total Part A Part B. Adjustments. (a) Scope of Supply (b) Technical Compliance (c) Specified technical Evaluation Factors (d) Terms of Payment (e) Delivery or Work Schedule (f) Etc. Sub-Total Part B TOTAL EVALUATED BID PRICE Application of Domestic Preference (See attachment to this Appendix) 1 Use a table for each package if necessary. Bidder No. l Bidder No. 2 Bidder No. 3 Etc. Appendix 7(B) Appendix 7(B) Table of Bid Price Adjustment (Civil Works Contract) (Refer to Table of Bid Prices) Bid No. ................................ for ............................................... (Bid/Contract/Title) ....................................................................... (Currency of Bid Comparison) Section Title of Sections 1. Mobilization 2. Securities and Insurance 3. Earthworks 4. Piling and Foundation 5. Concrete Works 6. Metal Work 7. Electromechanical Work 8 Drainage Structures 9. Etc. Sub-Total Part A Adjustments (a) Payment Terms (b) Construction Period (c) Liquidated Damages (d) Etc. Sub-Total Part B TOTAL EVALUATED BID PRICE Application of Domestic Preference (See attachment to this Appendix) Agency’s Estimate Bidder No. 1 Bidder No. 2 Bidder No. 3 Etc. 49 50 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION Appendix 7(A and B) Attachment 1 Application of Domestic Preference (Sample for Goods) Bidder No. 1 (Group A Bid) Evaluated Bid Price Bidder No. 3 (Group C Bid) $111,000,000.00 $10,500,000.00 15% of the Imported Goods (CIF/ CIP Price) Offered – $ 1,575,000.00 Total Evaluated Bid Price (With Domestic Preference) $111,000,000.00 $12,075,000.00 Application of Domestic Preference (Sample for Civil Works) Bidder No. 1 (Group A Bid) Domestic Contractor Eligible for the Preference Bidder No. 2 (Group B Bid) Other Contractor $12,575,000.00 $11,105,000.00 – $ 832,875.00 $12,575,000.00 $11,937,875.00 Evaluated Bid Price 7.5% of the Bid Price 1 Total Evaluated Bid Price (with Domestic Preference) 1 Bid Price of Bidder No. 2 is $11,000,000.00. Appendix 7(C) Appendix 7(C) Table of Bid Price Adjustment (Plant – Design, Supply, and Installation) (Refer to Table of Bid Prices) Bid No. ................................ for ............................................... (Bid/Contract/Title) ....................................................................... Schedule No. 1 Title of Schedule Executing Agency’s Estimate Bidder No. 1 Bidder No. 2 Bidder No. 3 Part A: Bid Price Plant Supplied from Abroad Spare Parts Supplied from Abroad 2 Plant Supplied from Within the Employer’s Country Spare Parts Supplied from Within the Employer’s Country Design Services 3 Installation and Other Services 4 Sub-Total ( 1-4) continued on next page 51 52 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION Table continued Schedule No. Title of Schedule Part B: Adjustments (a) C ontract Completion Time (b) Q uantifiable Deviations and Omissions (c) O perating and Maintenance Costs (d) F unctional Guarantees of the Facilities (e) Work, Services to be Provided by the Employer Sub-Total (a to e) Total Evaluated Bid Price (Part A + Part B) Application of Domestic Preference (see Attachment 1 to this Appendix) Executing Agency’s Estimate Bidder No. 1 Bidder No. 2 Bidder No. 3 Appendix 7(C) Appendix 7(C) Attachment 1 Application of Domestic Preference (Sample for Plant – Design, Supply, and Installation) No. Item 1 Plant Supplied from Abroad 2 Spare Parts Supplied from Abroad 3 Total Price (1 + 2) 4 15% of the Total Price Bidder No. 1 (CIF/CIP) Bidder No. 2 (CIF/CIP) Bidder No. 3 (CIF/CIP) Final Evaluated Bid Price (With Domestic Preference) Bidder No. 1 1 Evaluated Bid Price 2 15% of the Total Price for Plant and Spare Parts Supplied from Abroad 3 Final Evaluated Bid Price (1 + 2) Bidder No. 2 Bidder No. 3 1 1 Inclusive of Bid Prices (Plant and Spare Parts Supplied from Abroad, Plant and Spare Parts Supplied from Within the Employer’s Country, Design Services, Installation and Other Charges), and Adjustments on the Bid Prices based on the evaluation factors stipulated in the Section on Evaluation and Qualification Criteria of the bidding document. 53 1 Conflict of Interest Gov’tOwned Enterp. UN Eligibility Contract NonPerformance Pend. Litigation Contract Non-Performance Historical Financial Ave. Annual Performance Turnover Financial Situation Experience Quantitative information on bidder submission to meet requirements shall be presented under each column for easy comparison with each qualification criterion and requirement. 7 ..n1 ..n 3 2 1 ADB Eligibility Eligibility Qualification Criteria1 Evaluation of Bidders’ Qualifications Financial Similar Size Key Resour-ces and Nature Activities Bidder Nationality Others No. Requirement Requirement Requirement Requirement Requirement Requirement Requirement Requirement Requirement Requirement Requirement Requirement (if any) Results Remarks Appendix 8 54 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION 55 PART 2 Examples of Bid Evaluation 56 Example 1: Supply Contract In order to maintain the confidentiality of the procurement proceedings, references to the name of the borrower, the borrower’s country and currency, the executing agency, the name and address of the executing agency and the project site, the names of the bidders and bidders’ representatives, the number and title of the ADB loan have been deleted. The borrower, the borrower’s country, the executing agency, the name and address of the executing agency and the project site, the names of bidders’ representatives, and the number and title, of the ADB loan have been replaced with combinations of the letter “x,” the name of the borrower’s currency has been referred to as “Local Currency (LC),” and the bidders have been identified by number and referred to as “Bidder No. 1,” “Bidder No. 2,” etc. [The Appendixes in this example may not have adopted those provisions recommended in the main text of this Guide, as they were based on those of the Guide version available at the time the evaluation reports were prepared.] SUPPLY CONTRACT Letterhead of the Executing Agency Our Reference; xxxx/xxxx/xxx (07) 7 April 2007 Director Energy Division, Regional Department Asian Development Bank 6 ADB Avenue, Mandaluyong City 1550, Philippines Subject: Loan No. xxxxxxx: xxxxxx Award of Contract for The Supply of Ammonia Distillation and Absorption Unit Bid No. 05/06 (ICB) Dear Sir, In compliance with the requirements of the Loan Agreement and the project procurement plan, we are submitting herewith three copies (3) of the Bid Evaluation Report for The Supply of Ammonia Distillation and Absorption Unit, Bid No. 05/06 (ICB) for ADB’s review and approval. We would like to mention that the award of the Contract as recommended in the Report has been approved by the Chairman of xxxxxx on 3 April 20xx. As you will note, the validity of the bids expires on 20 May 2007. We would therefore, appreciate receiving your approval of the recommendations made in the Report in time to advise the successful bidder before the expiration of the bids. Sincerely yours, Signed General Manager xxxxxxxxxxxxxx Attachment: Three copies of Report 57 58 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION XXXXXX BID EVALUATION REPORT FOR SUPPLY OF AMMONIA DISTILLATION AND ABSORPTION UNIT ID No. 05/06 (ICB) ADB LOAN No. XXXXXXX 30 MARCH 20xx SUPPLY CONTRACT Contents (Supply Contract) 1. Introduction��59 1.1 General��59 1.2 Submission of Bids................................................................................................................................................................... 59 1.3 Bid Opening��59 1.4 Basic Data and Exchange Rates��59 1.5 Bid Evaluation Committee.................................................................................................................................................... 60 2. Examination of Bids........................................................................................................................................62 2.1 List of Bidders��62 2.2 Bid Documents��62 2.3 Bid Validity and Bid Security��63 2.4 Propriety of Signature and Power of Attorney��63 3. Determination of Substantial Responsiveness of Bids��63 3.1 Eligibility of Bidders and Goods.......................................................................................................................................... 63 3.2 Bidders’ Qualifications��63 3.3 Compliance with Commercial Terms and Conditions��64 3.4 3.5 3.3.1 Bid Validity and Bid Security��64 3.3.2 Time for Completion/ Contract Execution Schedule��64 3.3.3 Terms of Payments��64 3.3.4 Deviations or Reservations to Commercial Conditions��64 Technical Requirements��65 3.4.1 Technology��65 3.4.2 Compliance with Technical Specifications��65 Clarifications��65 4. Detailed Evaluation of Price Bids��65 4.1 Selection of Bids for Detailed Evaluation��65 4.2 Arithmetic Check and Corrections��66 4.3 Price Adjustment for Commercial Terms and Conditions��66 4.4 Price Adjustment for Technical Requirements��66 59 60 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION 5. Determination of the Lowest Evaluated Bid��68 5.1 Lowest Evaluated Bid��68 5.2 Domestic Preference Scheme��68 5.3 Reasonableness of the Lowest Evaluated Bid Price.................................................................................................... 69 6. Conclusions and Recommendations��69 Appendixes 1 Record of Bid Opening........................................................................................................................................................... 70 2 Basic Data Sheet��73 3 Examination of Bids��74 4 Details on Eligibility of Bidders��75 5 Evaluation of Bidders’ Qualifications��76 6 Substantial Responsiveness of Bids (Commercial Terms)��77 7 Salient Features of Bids (Commercial Terms)��78 8 Substantial Responsiveness of Bids (Major Technical Requirements)��79 9 Salient Features of Bids (Major Technical Requirements)��80 10 Summary of Bid Prices (Arithmetic Corrections and Corrected Bid Prices)��83 11 Comparison of Bid Prices with Price Adjustments��84 12 Required Minor Changes��85 SUPPLY CONTRACT 1. Introduction 1.1 General The xxxxxx has received a loan from the Asian Development Bank (ADB) to finance the cost of implementing the Project. It is intended that part of the proceeds of this loan will be applied to payment for the supply of equipment and services for the renovation and upgrading of the Ammonia Distillation and Absorption Unit of xxxxxx for which these bids were invited. The Invitation for Bids was advertised in the 19 and 23 November 20xx issues of two local English language newspapers, xxxxx and xxxxxx and in the ADB website on 23 November 20xx. The brief report on the advertising, which includes the names of the newspapers, the dates of the advertisement was forwarded to ADB under cover of xxxxxx’s letter, dated 26 November 20xx. The site visit and pre-bid meeting were held on 17 December 20xx at xxxxxx as stipulated in the bidding documents. Nine potential bidders out of twelve firms which purchased the bidding documents attended the pre-bid meeting. The minutes of the pre-bid meeting were prepared and sent to the firms who purchased the bidding documents. An addendum to the bidding documents was issued to all firms which purchased the bidding documents on 20 December 20xx, to clarify certain aspects of the Technical requirements of the bidding documents. 1.2 Submission of Bids The deadline for the submission of bids was not extended and the receipt of bids by the xxxxx at the Administrative Division of xxxxxx was closed at 10:30 a.m. local time on 21 January 2007 as scheduled. Out of twelve firms which purchased the bidding documents, six bidders submitted bids. 1.3 Bid Opening Bids were opened as scheduled in the bidding documents, at 11 a.m. on 21 January 20xx at the meeting room, second floor of the Administration Building by the Bid Opening Committee in the presence of representatives of bidders. Each bidder’s name, bid price, discount or alternative offer, if any, and the presence or absence of the requisite bid security and its amount were announced and recorded. The Record of Bid Opening was prepared soon after the bids were announced and a copy of the Record of Bid Opening was furnished to ADB under cover of xxx’s letter, dated 24 January 20xx. A copy is attached as Appendix 1. 1.4 Basic Data and Exchange Rates The exchange rates used for the evaluation were the selling rates officially prescribed for similar transactions by the National Bank on 21 January 20xx (i.e. the date of bid opening). Basic information pertaining to the bidding was summarized and presented in the Appendix 2. 61 62 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION 1.5 Bid Evaluation Committee A Bid Evaluation Committee comprising four senior officers of xxxxxx was established by the Chairman of xxxxxx. Assistance was provided by the staff of the Administrative Division of the xxxxxx. The Bid Evaluation Committee members were: (1) Chairman General Manager; xxxxxx (2) Member Manager, Operations, xxxxxx (3) Member Director, Planning Department, xxxxxx. (4) Member/Secretary Manager, Finance and Marketing, xxxxxx The Committee’s decisions were made on the basis of unanimous views and whenever a unanimous decision could not be reached on certain issues, these issues were brought to the attention of the Chairman of xxxxxx for n decision. 2.Examination of Bids 2.1 List of Bidders The names of the bidders, their nationalities, the capacity in which they submitted their bids, the source of the goods and the domestic preference category claimed are shown in the following table. Bidders No. Name Domestic Preference Nationality Capacity Source of Goods Category 1. Bidder No. 1 xxxxxx Importer Domestic and xxxxxx Category II 2. Bidder No. 2 xxxxxx Manufacturer xxxxxx Category III 3. Bidder No. 3 xxxxxx Manufacturer xxxxxx Category III 4. Bidder No. 4 xxxxxx Exporter xxxxxx Category III 5. Bidder No. 5 xxxxxx Manufacturer xxxxxx Category III 6. Bidder No. 6 xxxxxx Manufacturer xxxxxx Category III 2.2 Bid Documents The bids submitted were examined to verify that the bidders had submitted all the documents and information required by the bidding document. The following documents, were examined: (i) Form of Bid and Price Schedules; (ii) Bid Security; (iii)Joint Venture Agreement or Letter of Intent to Enter into an Agreement, if required; (iv) Propriety of Signature and Power of Attorney; SUPPLY CONTRACT (v) Documents establishing the eligibility of bidders and goods; (vi)Documents required to assess the qualification of bidders and their manufacturers; and (vii)Documents required to establish the goods’ conformity with the bidding documents. The results of checking for completeness of bid documents are presented in Appendix 3 Examination of Bids. 2.3 Bid Validity and Bid Security A bid validity period of at least 120 days from the date of bid opening was specified in the bidding documents. All bidders except Bidder No.2 offered a bid validity period as required. All bidders submitted bid securities in the form of bank guarantees, and fulfilled the requirements in the amount, terms and period of validity except Bidder No.2. 2.4 Propriety of Signature and Power of Attorney All bid documents were signed in accordance with the Instructions to Bidders and corrections were also initialed by the authorized person. The power of attorney for the. signatories of all bids were acceptable The results of these examinations are included in Appendix 3. 3. Determination of Substantial Responsiveness of Bids 3.1 Eligibility of Bidders and Goods In Clauses 4 and 5 of the Instructions to Bidders of the bidding documents it was specified that the bidder, and the goods and the services to be supplied shall be from an eligible source country of ADB. All bidders submitted certifications and necessary documentation which indicated that they are nationals of an eligible member country of ADB, and offered goods and services originating in an eligible member country of ADB (See Appendix 4 Details on Eligibility of Bidders). 3.2 Bidders’ Qualifications The bidding documents in Clause 19 of the Instructions to Bidders, required that each bidder submits with its bid such evidence of its technical capacity and financial capability by completing properly the forms provided with the bidding documents. All bidders submitted the forms with their bids. The detailed review of the bidders’ information provided in these forms and further clarifications requested from the bidders showed that all bidders are qualified financially and Technically to perform the Contract. The results of the detailed review are summarized in Appendix 5 Evaluation of Bidders’ Qualifications. 63 64 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION 3.3 Compliance with Commercial Terms and Conditions 3.3.1 Bid Validity and Bid Security Bidder No.2 offered a bid validity period of only 60 days and stated in the covering letter that further extension may be considered upon request. Moreover, the amount of the bid security of Bidder No.2 was equivalent to 1.29% of its total bid price and did not satisfy the specified requirements of a minimum of 2% of the bid price. After due consideration of all relevant factors, in particular fairness to all other bidders who complied with the requirements, it was concluded that the bid of Bidder No.2 should be rejected as such deviations in bid validity and bid security are considered as major. 3.3.2 Time for Completion/Contract Execution Schedule The contract execution schedules and sequence of delivery of major units of plant to be supplied were evaluated in detail and compared with the requirements of the bidding documents. The contract execution schedules submitted by the bidders were generally in order and complied with the execution schedule of the bidding documents. A number of minor changes will be necessary (see Appendix 12). Such changes were considered minor and should be finalized at contract negotiations with the successful bidder. 3.3.3 Terms of Payments All bidders accepted the terms and conditions of the bidding documents with respect to payment and they also accepted the fixed sum without price adjustment provision. The bidding documents specified that all payments will be made through an irrevocable letter of credit following the ADB commitment procedure. All accepted these arrangements, except that Bidder No.3 requested a “confirmed” irrevocable letter of credit. upon clarification, the bidder replied that the additional cost for confirmation of the letter of credit will be borne by the bidder. The request was considered reasonable and, therefore, acceptable if the bidder is the successful bidder. 3.3.4 Deviations or Reservations to Commercial Conditions None of the bids contained substantial reservations to the major commercial conditions of the bidding documents. All bidders accepted the provisions for liquidated damages, functional guarantees and corresponding adjustments, performance security, warranty requirements and after sales service. See Appendix 6 for a summary of the Substantial Responsiveness of Bids (Commercial Terms) and Appendix 7 Salient Features of Bids (Commercial Terms). SUPPLY CONTRACT 3.4 Technical Requirements 3.4.1 Technology The Ammonia Distillation Columns and Absorption Towers, being high steel structures, were considered as the two main important items of equipment for the project, and special attention has been given in the evaluation with respect to design, quality, reliability and safety. The evaluation showed that the manufacturers of all bidders fulfilled the required standards satisfactorily. 3.4.2 Compliance with Technical Specifications All the remaining five bidders satisfactorily complied with the total scope of the contract and generally met the major requirements of the specifications. Bidder No. 6 did not mention clearly the continuous operating period of the Ammonia Absorption Tower. Clarification was requested and the bidder submitted a guarantee for a continuous period of 1714 months which satisfied the specified period of a minimum of 12 months. See Appendix 8 Substantial Responsiveness to the Major Technical Requirements of the bidding documents and Appendix 9 Salient Features of Bids (Technical Requirements). 3.5 Clarifications Throughout the evaluation, bidders were requested to provide clarifications in order to establish that the equipment and services to be supplied were in accordance with the provisions of the bidding documents. Clarifications which may have led to a change in the substance of a bid were not requested. The requests for clarifications and the replies from the bidders were in writing. All correspondence was properly recorded and filed together with the respective original bid. 4.Detailed Evaluation of Bids 4.1 Selection of Bids for Detailed Evaluation As discussed in Section 3 above, all bids, except the bid of Bidder No.2, have been determined as substantially responsive to the bidding documents. Their ranking in order of price is summarized as follows: Bidder No Name of Bidder Corrected Bid Price (LC) Ranking Variation 3 Bidder No. 3 12,337,197.0 (1) - 1 Bidder No. 1 12,689,200.0 (2) 2.85% 5 Bidder No. 5 13,200,000.0 (3) 6.99% 6 Bidder No. 6 13,704,803.0 (4) 11.08% 4 Bidder No. 4 15,656,234.0 (5) 26.90% As the variation in price between the first four bidders is only 11.08% and there is a large variation between the fourth and fifth bidder, it was decided to evaluate only the four lowest bids. It was considered unlikely that the bid of Bidder No. 4 would become the lowest evaluated substantially responsive bidder due to the price difference and, as the highest Category III bidder, had no advantage 65 66 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION in the application of domestic preference. The bid of Bidder No. 4 would only be evaluated if the adjustments made to the four lowest bids resulted in their evaluated prices being higher than the price of Bidder No. 4. 4.2 Arithmetic Correction Each bid was checked for arithmetic errors in accordance with the provisions of the bidding documents. Corrections were necessary only in the bid of Bidder No.6. The total bid price was increased by S$21,5888.00. See Appendix 10 Summary of Bid Prices (Arithmetic Corrections and Corrected Bid Prices). The arithmetic check of Bidder No.2 was not carried out as the bid was disqualified because of reasons discussed in the following paragraph 3.4.1. 4.3 Price Adjustments for Commercial Terms and Conditions All four bidders selected for detailed evaluation accepted the commercial terms and conditions of the bidding documents. Thus, no price adjustments were required in this respect. 4.4 Price Adjustments for Technical Requirements The scope of supply, Technical information and Technical data submitted by the bidders were scrutinized in detail and a comparison was carried out with the Technical requirements of the bidding documents. All four bidders submitted substantially completed information and generally satisfied the Technical requirements of the bidding documents. The Table of Salient Features of Bids to the Technical Requirements was prepared and presented as Appendix 9. The findings of the scrutiny are briefly explained below. (a) Bidder No. 1. The bidder did not clearly indicate in its bid that allowance had been made for the Technical services to be provided for design and Technical documentation of the plant, and clarification was requested from the bidder. The bidder explained at the clarification meeting that the cost of detailed design and preparation of Technical documents was included in the bid price. The explanation at the clarification meeting was confirmed in writing. It was considered that the bidder’s clarification that the cost of the design and Technical documentation was included in the price is acceptable for the following reasons. • although the bidding documents required that the bidder shall include the cost of design and Technical documentation in the bid, the price schedule did not include a separate bid item; and • all other bidders also stated that the cost for this Technical service was included in the bid price of equipment. SUPPLY CONTRACT It was, therefore, concluded that this should not be considered as a missing item and no price adjustment was made. (b) Bidder No. 3. The bidder stated clearly in the bid that the costs of design and Technical documentation were included in the unit bid prices of the respective equipment. However, the costs for (i) the specified spare parts, (ii) the special tools, and (iii) Technical services for installation etc., were not included in the bid price but the bidder had submitted detailed lists and detailed costing of these items with its bid. (i) Spare Parts as specified in the bidding documents. The bidder submitted the list of spare parts with itemized rates together with its bid. The cost of spare parts quoted was $25,650.00 (LC42,322.50 equivalent) and this amount was added to the bid price for comparison. (ii) Special Tools The bidder submitted a detailed list of special tools that were considered necessary for the operations & maintenance of the plant. The itemized unit rates were also provided and it was stated in the covering letter that increase, decrease or deletion to the recommended list should be made according to the Purchaser’s requirements. The list was reviewed and it was concluded that the proposed special tools will be required for proper operations & maintenance of the plant. The bidder’s quoted price for the special tools was $59,550.00 (LC15,758.50 equivalent); this amount was added to the bid price for comparison. (iii)Technical Services for Installation, Testing, and Commissioning and Training As discussed above, the bidder submitted a separate proposal for these Technical services. The information provided by the bidder was quite adequate for evaluation. It was considered that the level of proposed Technical services to be provided was in line with the requirements specified in the bidding documents. The experience and Technical background of the proposed personnel were acceptable. Therefore, the quoted price of $56,490.00 (LC93,208.50) was considered reasonable and the amount was added to the bid price. 67 68 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION (c) Bidder No. 6 The bidder did not indicate nor provide the list of special tools required for the offered plant. During the bid clarification meeting, the bidder admitted its failure to submit the list of special tools. The bidder confirmed this matter in writing and later submitted a list of special tools. The bidder also stated in the letter that although the list was not included in the bid documents, the review of their records showed that the approximate cost for the special tools was already included in the bid price of equipment and the special tools will be supplied without increasing the bid price. The failure of the bidder to submit a list of special tools with the bid was considered as an omission. Therefore, the cost of LC18,500.00 estimated by the consultant was added to the bid price for bid comparison only. 5. Determination of the Lowest Evaluated Bid 5.1 Lowest Evaluated Bid The arithmetically corrected bid prices and adjusted prices for compliance with the Technical requirements as discussed in paragraph 4.3 above were shown in Appendix 11 Bid Prices Comparison with Price Adjustments. As the comparison shows, the lowest evaluated substantially responsive bid is that submitted by Bidder No. 3, in the contract amount as shown below: (i) Supply of Main Equipment and Materials $ 7,477,089.00 (ii) Spare Parts as Specified $ 25,650.00 (iii) Special Tools $ 9,550.00 (iv) Technical Services for Installation etc $ 56.490.00 5.2 Total $ 7,568,779.00 (or LC 12,488,48500 equivalent) Domestic Preference Scheme Bidder No.1 was classified as a Group B bidder as some of the goods to be provided under the contract were domestic goods but the total domestic value added to the total schedule of goods did not equal al least 30%. Bidders Nos. 3, 5, and 6 offered totally imported goods and were, therefore, classified as Category Ill bidders. The domestic preference scheme is applied as follows: (i)if the lowest evaluated bid is from Group A or Group B, it will be selected for award of contract; and (ii)if the lowest evaluated bid is from Group C, it will be further compared with the lowest evaluated bid from Group A by adding 15% of the CIF or SUPPLY CONTRACT CIP bid price of such goods If the lowest evaluated bid from Group A is then determined to be the lower, it will be selected for award of contract; if not, the lowest evaluated bid front Group C will be selected for award. As none of the bidders were classified as Group A, the domestic preference scheme allows the award of contract to be made to the lowest evaluated bidder from either Group B or Group C. 5.3 Reasonableness of the Lowest Evaluated Bid Price The estimate of the contract price prepared by the consultant as part of the improvement program, based on the prices prevailing in 20xx, was LC12,136,000.00 including Technical services and spare parts for operations & maintenance for 2 years. The lowest evaluated bid exceeds that estimate by less than 3%, a difference roughly equivalent to the price increase in titanium in the world market. Also, considering the stringent requirements of functional guarantees of the plant specified in the bidding documents, it was considered that the price quoted by the Bidder No.3, the lowest evaluated bid, was reasonable. 6.Conclusions and Recommendations Based on the detailed evaluation and findings presented in this report, it was concluded that Bidder No.3, had submitted the lowest evaluated substantially responsive bid and the Contract should be awarded at the bid price of $7,568,779.00, equivalent at the rate of exchange used for the comparison of bids to LC12,488,485.00. It is recommended that the Asian Development Bank approve the award and notify us of its approval in time to issue the Notice of Award to the successful bidder before expiration of the bid validity on 20 May 20xx. 69 70 Appendix 1 Page 1 of 3 Record of Bid Opening Loan No. xxxxxxx Project Title : xxxxxx Bid No. 05/06 Bid Title : Supply of Ammonia Distillation and Absorption Unit 1. The following bids were received by the closing deadline fixed on 21 January 2007 at 10:30 a.m. and were publicly opened and read at 11 a.m. on the same date. Bid Price 1 Bid Name of Bidder No. Nationality Bid Security Amount Foreign Currency Local Currency (LC) Discounts Offered Signature 1 Bidder No. 1 LC 295,000.00 (2.32%) $6,152,339.00 2,537,840.00 - Signed 2 Bidder No.2 LC195,000.00 (1.29%) $7,785,297.00 2,266,860.00 - Signed 3 Bidder No. 3 US $175,000.00 (2.34%) $7,477,089.001 - - Signed 4 Bidder No. 4 Y21,500.000.00 (2.16%) Y997,212,350.00 - - Signed 5 Bidder No. 5 Y 18,200,000.00 (2.16%) Y840,764,330.00 - - Signed 6 Bidder No.6 S$255,000M (2.12%) S$12,000,257.00 - - Signed he bidders submitted the costs for (i) the specified spare parts, (ii) the special tools and (iii) Technical services for T installation, testing and commissioning and training, separately as follows: (i) specified spare parts (ii) special tools (iii) Technical services for installation $25,650.00 $ 9,550.00 $56,490.00 SUPPLY CONTRACT Page 2 of 3 2.The following bidders’ representatives attended the public opening of bids and a copy of the attendance sheet is attached as an annexure of this record. Serial No. 1. Name Designation Bidding Company Represented Mr. xxxxxx Manager Bidder No. 4 Domestic Branch 2. Mr. xxxxxx Deputy Director Bidder No. 1 International Marketing 3. Mr. xxxxxx Local Representative Bidder No. 5 4. Mr. xxxxxx Chief Mechanical Engineer Bidder No. 2 5. Mr. xxxxxx Deputy Director Bidder No. 3 South East Asia Region 6. Mr. xxxxxx Assistant Director Bidder No. 6 Export Division 3. Matters transpiring during the opening of bids. The representative of Bidder No. 3, requested the Bid Opening Committee (i) to announce that there was no discount offered by any bidder and (ii) to confirm the amount of bid security and the bid price of Bidder No. 2 because the bid security amount seemed to be less than 2% of the bid price as specified in the bidding documents. The chairman of the Committee confirmed that (i) there was no discount offered by any bidder and (ii) the announced amount of the bid security and the bid price of Bidder No. 2 were correct. 4. Reading and signing of documents ended at 12 p.m. Signed Member Manager, Operations Signed Chairman General Manager Signed Member Director, Planning Dept. 71 72 Appendix 1 Page 3 of 3 Attendance Sheet at Opening of Bids Loan No. xxxxx Project Title : xxxxxx Bid No. 05/06 Bid Title : Supply of Ammonia Distillation and Absorption Unit Place : Meeting Room Second Floor, Administration Building, xxxxxx Date : 21 January 2007 Time 11 a.m. The following bidders’ representatives attended the public opening of bids. Representative Sr. No. Bidders Name Designation Signature 1. Bidder No.4 Mr. xxxxxx Manager, Domestic Branch Signed 2. Bidder No.1 Mr. xxxxxx Deputy Director Signed 3. Ridder No 5 Mr. xxxxxx Local Representative Signed 4. Bidder No.2 Mr. xxxxxx Chief Mechanical Engineer Signed 5. Bidder No.3 Mr .xxxxxx Deputy Director South East Asia Region Signed 6. Bidder No. 6 Mr. xxxxxx Asst. Director Signed 73 Appendix 2 Basic Data Sheet 1 Project Title xxxxxx 2 Loan Number xxxxxxx 3 Bid TitleSupply of Ammonia Distillation and Absorption Unit, xxxxxx 4 Bid Number 05/06 5 Estimated Value Local Currency 12,136,000.00 6 Date Invitation for Bids issued 19 November 2006 Method of Procurement Bidding Procedure International Competitive Bidding Single-Stage: One-Envelope 8 Bid Closing Date and Time 10:30 a.m. on 21 January 2007 9 Bid Opening Date and Time 11 a.m. on 21 January 2007 10 Number of Bids Received Six (6) Bids 11 Bid Validity Expires 20 May 2007 12 Bid Security Amount Not less than 2% of the Bid Price 13 Bid Security Validity Expires on 17 June 2007 Date for Determining Applicable Exchange Rates 21 January 2007 (Date of Bid Opening) 7 14 15 Exchange Rates for Evaluation US Dollar I = LC 1.65 Japanese Yen 100 = LC 1.57 Singapore Dollar 1 = LC 1.14 Source: The Selling exchange rates of the National Bank of xxxxxx. 74 Appendix 3 Examination of Bids Bidder No. Item Description 1 2 3 4 5 6 Bid Documents 1 1.1 One Original and Two Copies Y Y Y Y Y Y 1.2 Form of Bid Y Y Y Y Y Y 1.3 Price Schedules Y Y Y Y Y Y 1.4 Bid Validity and Bid Security Y Y Y Y Y Y 1.5 Schedules of Particular Information (1) Contract Execution Schedule Y P Y P Y Y (2) Financial Data Y P Y Y Y Y (3) Technical Data Y Y y P Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Submitted with Bid P P Y P Y Y Joint Venture Agreement or Formal Intent to Enter into an Agreement NA Y NA NA NA NA Propriety of Signature and Completeness Y Y Y Y Y Y 2.1 Power of Attorney Y Y Y Y Y Y 2.2 Bid Form and Price Schedules, properly signed or not Y Y Y Y Y Y Completeness of Bids Y Y Y Y Y Y (4) Manufacturer’s Organization (5) References from Previous Employers 1.6 1.7 2 2.3 Drawings and Documents to be Y = YES P = PARTIAL N = NA = NO NOT APPLICABLE Provide details if “P,” “N,” or “NA” Conflict of Interest Declared Ineligible by ADB Government-owned enterprise in Purchaser’s country to be legally and financially autonomous,operate under commercial law, and not dependent agency of the Purchaser. Not having been declared ineligible based on a United Nations resolution. 4 5 6 Proposed subcontractors or Suppliers must be nationals of an eligible ADB member country. Bidder must be a national of an eligible ADB member country. If Joint Venture, all partners must be jointly and severally liable. Single Entity or Joint Venture Requirements 3 2 1 No. Appendix 4 Section 1, Clause 4.7 Section 1, Clause 4.5 Section 1, Clause 4.4 Section 1, Clause 4.3 Section 1, Clause 4.2 Section 1, Clause 4.1 Bidding Documents Reference Not declared ineligible Not a govt. owned enterprise No None X (all from eligible ADB member countries) X (Country Name) Single Entity Bidder No. 1 Not declared ineligible Not a govt. owned enterprise No None XXX (all from eligible ADB member countries) XX and XXX Joint Venture Partners are jointly and severally liable. Bidder No. 2 Not declared ineligible Not a govt. owned enterprise No None XX (all from eligible ADB member countries) XX Single Entity Bidder No. 3 Not declared ineligible Not a govt. owned enterprise No None XX (all from eligible ADB member countries) XX Single Entity Bidder No. 4 Details on Eligibility of Bidders Not declared ineligible Not a govt. owned enterprise No None XX (all from eligible ADB member countries) XXXX Single Entity Bidder No. 5 Not declared ineligible Not a govt. owned enterprise. No None XX (all from eligible ADB member countries) XXX and XX Joint Venture Partners are jointly and severally liable. Bidder No. 6 75 No Pending Litigation No Pending Litigation No Pending Litigation Pending Litigation is equivalent to 10% of Net Worth Pending Litigation is equivalent to 15% of Net Worth No Pending Litigation 2 3 4 5 6 Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Must not represent more than 50% of Bidder’s Net Worth Pending Litigation: 1 Bidder No. Appendix 5 $3.0 million $3.5 million $4.0 million $3.0 million $2.2 million $2.3 million $2.0 million Turnover Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass +3.2 million +7.5 million +8.8 million +2.9 million +3.8 million +5.0 million Must be Positive for the Last 3 Years Net Worth Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass $4.0 million $5.0 million $6.0 million $4.5 million $3.5 million $4.0 million $3.0 million Cash Flow Capacity Qualification Criteria Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass 300 units/ month 350 units/ month 355 units/ month 350 units/ month 250 units/ month 300 units/ month 200 units/ month Production Capacity Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Evaluation of Bidders’ Qualifications 4 Years 4 Years 5 Years 5 Years 3 Years 4 Years Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Goods offered been in Production for at least 3 Years Technical Experience Qualified Qualified Qualified Qualified Qualified Qualified Remarks 76 77 Appendix 6 Substantial Responsiveness of Bids (Commercial Terms) Serial No. 1. Requirements Power of Attorney Bidder No. Bidding Doc. Reference 1 2 3 4 5 6 Section 1 Clause 22 C C C C C C Section 2, ITB. 22.1 2. Signature on Bid Form and Price Schedule “ C C C C C C 3 Joint Venture Agreement or Letter of Intent to Enter into an Agreement Section 1, GC 4.1 NA C NA NA NA NA 4. Eligibility (a) Bidder Section 1, Clause 44 C C C C C C (b) Goods and Services Section 1, Clause 5 C C C C C C 5. Bid Validity 120 days Section 1, Clause 20 C NC1 C C C C 6. Bid Security Section 1, Clause 21 (a) Amount Section 2, ITB 21.1 C NC2 C C C C (b) Validity C NC C C C C (c) Format and Terms C C C C C C C C C C C C Section 8, Clause 16.1 C C C C C C Section 6 C C C C C C R NR R R R R Section 2, ITB 20.1 7. Fixed Price Section 1, Clause 14 3 Section 2, ITB 14.7 8. Terms of Payment 9. Functional Guarantees CONCLUSION C = Complied R = Responsive 1 2 3 4 NC = Not Complied NR = Not Responsive NA = Applicable Bid Validity Period is 60 days instead of the 120 days specified in bidding documents. Bid Security Amount is only 1.29% instead of the minimum 2% specified. Bid Security Validity is for 90 days instead of the 150 days specified. See details in Attachment 1 to this Appendix. 78 Appendix 7 Salient Features of Bids (Commercial Terms) Serial No. Bidder No. Bidding Document Reference 1 3 5 6 Section 1, Clause 22 C C C C C C C C C C C C (b) Manufacturer C C C C (c) Goods and Services C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C*1 C C (c) 45% Upon Shipment C C C C (d) 25%Upon Arrival at Project Site C C C C (e) 10% Upon Completion of Installation C C C C (f)10% Upon Completion of Warranty Period C C C C 7 Liquidated Damage, and Performance Security C C C C 8 Fixed Price C C C C C C C C ND ND ND ND 1 Requirements Power of Attorney Section 2, ITB 22.1 2 Signature of Documents 3 Eligibility Section 1. (a) Bidder Clauses 4, 5 4 Bid Validity (120 days) Section 1, Clause 22 Section 1, Clause 20 Section 2, ITB 20.1 5 Bid Security Section 1, Clause 21 (a) Amount and Validity Section 2, ITB 21.1 (b) Format and Terms 6 Terms of Payment Section 8, Clause 16.1 (a) Irrevocable 1.c (b) 10% Advance Section 1, Clause 14 Section 2, ITB 14.7 9 Functional Guarantees FINDINGS C = Complied ND = No Deviation *1 NC = Section 6 Not Complied Requested “Confirmed Irrevocable L/C” and the cost for confirmation„ will be borne by the bidder. 79 Appendix 8 Substantial Responsiveness of Bids (Major Technical Requirements) Requirements of Bidding Documents Serial No. 1 Work Item and Requirements Ammonia Distillation Column Ref: Section 2 6 R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R NC1 Min. 700 t Soda Ash/d Set (ii) Continuous Operating Time Min. 12 months 3 Prelimer (incl. First Stage Flash Evaporator) Drawing 96J4- l R R R R R 4 Tail Ammonia Scrubber Drawing 46J5 1 R R R R R 5 Refined Salting Liquor Exchanger (titanium plate) Section 4, Part 1 R R R R R 6 Hot Ammoniated Brine Exchanger (titanium plate) Section 4, Part 1 R R R R R 7 Ammoniated Brine Exchanger (titanium plate) Section 4, Part 1 R R R R R 8 Ammoniated Brine Tank Drawing 96J7 R R R R R 9 Waste liquor Carbonating Tower Plant Capacity Min. 300 m’/h. Set Section 4, Part 1 R R R R R 10 Lime biln Gas Wash Tower dusting efficiency: 9.2% Drawing 96J2 R R R R R 11 Flash Evaporator Drawing 96J9 R R R R R 12 Carbonated Liquor Settling Tank Drawing 96J10 R R R R R R = Responsive NC = Not Complied FINDINGS: All five bids are substantially responsive. 1 5 Section 4, Part 1 (i) Production Capacity 4 Min. 4 months Ammonia, Absorption Tower 3 Min. 700 t Soda Ash/d. Set (ii) Continuous Operating Period 1 Section 4, Part 1 (i) Production Capacity Bidder No. Continuous Operation Time is not mentioned clearly. 80 Appendix 9 Salient Features of Bids (Technical Requirements) Sr. No. 1 Specified Terms and Conditions Scope of Supply 2 Materials and Equipment 2.1 Ammonia Distillation Column (a)Production Capacity: 700-800t soda ash/day per set (b)Steam Consumption 1.4per t of soda ash (steam pressure 0.2 MPA) (c)Continuous Operating Period Min. 4 months. (d)Construction Materials 2.2 Ammonia Absorption To, (a) Production Capacity: 700-800t soda ash/ d set (b)Absorption Efficiency at 99% Bidding Document Bidder Reference No.1 Price C Schedules The Technical and Section service, for 4 design and installation were not clearly mentioned Bidder No. 3 C Cost of spare parts, special tools, and Technical services were shown separately Bidder No. 5 C Bidder No.6 C Cost of special tools was not mentioned 700-800t 700-800t 700-800t 700-800t <l.4t <1.4t <1.4t <1.4t 4-5 months 4-5.5 months 4-6 months 4-5 months No deviation No deviation No deviation No deviation 700-800t 700-800t 700-800T 700-800t at 99% at 99% at 99% Clarification will be required. Section 4, Part 1 continued on next page SUPPLY CONTRACT Table continued Sr. No. 2.3 2.4 2.5 Bidding Document Specified Terms and Conditions Reference (c) Outlet Ammoniated Brine Composition TNH3 : 100-104 tt TCI 88.5-90.5tt (d) Temperature: 65↓ - 70↓C (e)Continuous Operating Period. Min 12 months. (f) Continuous Materials Prelimer (including First Stage Flash Evaporator) Tail Ammonia Scrubber Bidder No.6 Complied Complied Complied Complied Complied Complied Complied Complied Complied Complied Complied Complied 12-14 12-13 months. 12-13 12-14 months. months. months. As specified As specified As specified As specified No No No No deviation deviation deviation deviation No deviation No deviation Complied Complied Complied Complied Complied Complied Complied Complied Complied Complied Complied Complied Complied Complied Complied Complied Complied Complied Complied Complied Complied Complied Complied Complied No deviation No deviation No deviation No deviation (i) Capacity: 300-350 m3/h set 300-350m3 300-350m3 300- 350m3 300-350m3 (ii) Waste Liquor: PH 8.5-9.0 Complied Complied Complied Complied (iii) Outlet Tail CO2 : 8-10% Complied Complied Complied Complied (iv) Construction Materials No deviation No deviation No deviation No deviation Limebiln Gas Wash Tower - - - - (i) Deducting Efficiency: Min 92% 93% 92% 92% 93% Max.250 mg/ m3 No deviation Max. 250 mg/ m3 No deviation 2.9 Waste Liquor Carbonating Tower 2.10 Bidder No. 5 No deviation 2.8 2.7 Bidder No. 3 No deviation Refined Salting Liquor Exchanger (i) Design Pressure : 0.5 MPa (ii)Heat Exchanging Area : 120 m2/set Hot Ammoniated Brine Exchanger (i) Design Pressure : 0.5 MPa (ii)Heat ExchangingArea:120 m2/set Ammoniated Brine Exchanger (i) Design Pressure : 0.5 MPa (ii)Heat Exchanging Area : 120m2/set Ammoniated Brine Exchanger 2.6 Bidder No.1 (ii) Outlet Gas Dust Content: Max 250 mg/m3 Max. 250 Max. 250 mg/m3 mg/m3 No deviation No deviation (iii) Construction Materials 2.11 Flash Evaporator Complied Complied Complied Complied 2.12 Carbonated Settling Tank No deviation No deviation No deviation No deviation continued on next page 81 82 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION Sr. No. Bidding Document Specified Terms and Conditions Reference Bidder No.1 Bidder No. 3 Bidder No. 5 Bidder No.6 3 Special Tools Section 6 Complied Complied Not clearly mentioned 4 Technical Services Section 6 Not clearly mentioned Complied List and Price shown separately Complied Complied Complied Responsive. Responsive. Responsive. Price The Costs of Adjustment (i) Spare Parts for Technical (ii) S pecial Services will Tools, be required (iii) T echnical Services, shown separately should be to the bid price. Some minor clarification will be required; no price adjustment is needed. Price Adjustment for Special Tools should be made. FINDINGS Responsive. 83 Appendix 10 Summary of Bid Prices (Arithmetic Corrections and Corrected Bid Prices) Bid Price at Opening Arithmetic Correction Total Corrected Bid Price In US Bidder Foreign Local Foreign Local Foreign Local Foreign Local Dollar No. Currency Currency Currency Currency Currency Currency Currency Currency Equivalent¹ Ranking (1) (1) (2) (2) (3) (3) (4) = 1 ± (4) = 1 ± 2-3 2-3 1 2 3 4 5 6 ¹ Based on the Selling Exchange Rate: ………………………………….. Discounts Corrected Bid Price 84 Appendix 11 Comparison of Bid Prices with Price Adjustments (Bid Price in Local Currency) Serial. No. Particulars 1 Material and Equipment 1.1 Ammonia Distillation Column 1.2 Absorption Tower 1.3 Prelimer 1.4 Tail Ammonia Scrubber 1.5 Refined Salting Liquor Exchanger 1.6 Hot Ammoniated Brine Exchanger 1.7 Ammoniated Brine Exchanger 1.8 Ammoniated Brine Tank 1.9 Waste Liquor Carbonating Tower 1.10 Limebiln Gas Wash Tower 1.11 Flash Evaporator 1.12 Carbonated Liquor Settling Tank. Total Corrected Bid Price 2 3 Amount to be Adjusted (a) Commercial (b) Technical (i) Spare Parts as Specified (ii) Special Tools (iii) Technical Services for Installation, Commissioning and Training Total Evaluated Bid Price Bidder No. 3 Bidder No. 1 6,183.150.0 4,206,228.0 770.856.0 66,880.0 170,160.0 110,160.0 170,160.0 90,160.0 236,024.0 16,050.0 68,156.0 189,213.0 12,337,197.0 4,550,000.0 4,596,012.0 4,576,732.0 5,922,000.0 6,587,940.0 6,547,260.0 677,400.0 574,968.0 829,560.0 54,400.0 76,664.0 67,823.0 253,600.0 273,776.0 293,336.0 253,6000 273.776.0 293,336.0 253,600.0 273,776.0 293,336.0 144,400.0 153,328.0 128, 872.0 223,200.0 291,320.0 276,468.0 27,200.0 20,444.0 13,480.0 73,600.0 71,552.0 73,040.0 256,200.0 6,444.0 311,660.0 12,689,200.0 13,200,000.0 13,704,903.0 − − 42,322.0 15,758.0 93,208.0 − − − − − 84,900.0 Bidder No. 5 − − − − − −- Bidder No. 6 − − − 18,500.0 − − 12,488,485.0 12,774,100.0 13,200,000.0 13,723,403.0 85 Appendix 12 Required Minor Changes1 Bidder Requirement in the Bidding Document 1 3 5 6 1 To be finalized at contract negotiations with the successful bidder. Bidder’s Proposal Changes Required 86 Example 2: Civil Works Contract Single-Stage: One-Envelope Bidding Procedure In order to maintain the confidentiality of the procurement proceedings, references to the name of the borrower, the borrower’s country and currency, the executing agency, the name and address of the executing agency and the project site, the names of the bidders and bidders’ representatives, the number and title of the ADB loan have been deleted. The borrower, the borrower’s country, the executing agency, the name and address of the executing agency and the project site, the names of bidders’ representatives, and the number and title of the ADB loan have been replaced with combinations of the letter “x’, the name of the borrower’s currency has been referred to as “Local Currency (LC),” and the bidders have been identified by number and referred to as “Bidder No. 1,” “Bidder No. 2,” etc. [The Appendixes in this example may not have adopted those provisions recommended in the main text of this Guide, as they were based on those of the Guide version available at the time the evaluation reports were prepared.] CIVIL WORKS BID DATA CONTRACT SHEET Letterhead of the Executing Agency Our Reference; xxxx/xxxx/xxx (06) 9 October 2006 Director Energy Division, Regional Department 6 ADB Avenue, Mandaluyong City 1550, Philippines Subject : Loan No. xxxxxxx: xxxxxx LOT 1 Civil Works Bid No. 20/xxx/06 (ICB) Dear Sir, In compliance with the requirements of the Loan Agreement, we are submitting herewith three copies (3 ) of the Bid Evaluation Report for Lot I Civil Works, Bid No. 20/xxx006 (ICB) for ADB’s review and approval. We would like to mention that the award of the Contract as recommended in the Report has been approved by the President of the xxxxxx on 5 October 20xx. As you will note, the validity of the bids expires on 28 November 20xx. We would, therefore, appreciate receiving your approval of the recommendations made in the Report in time to advise the successful bidder before the expiration of the bids. Sincerely yours, Signed Project Director Attachment: Three copies of Report 87 88 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION XXXXXX BID EVALUATION REPORT FOR LOT 1 CIVIL WORKS BID No. 20/XXX/xx (ICB) ADB LOAN No. XXXXXXX 30 SEPTEMBER 20xx CIVIL WORKS BID DATA CONTRACT SHEET Contents (Civil Works Contract) 1. Introduction��91 1.1 General......................................................................................................................................................................................... 91 1.2 Submission of Bids��91 1.3 Bid Opening��91 1.4 Basic Data and Exchange Rates��91 1.5 Bid Evaluation Committee��91 2. Examination of Bids�� 92 2.1 Bid Documents��92 2.2 Submission of Bid Validity and Bid Security��92 2.3 Propriety of Signature and Power of Attorney��92 3. Determination of Substantial Responsiveness of Bids��93 3.1 Eligibility of Bidders and Goods��93 3.2 Bidders’ Qualifications��93 3.3 Compliance with Commercial Terms and Conditions��93 3.4 3.5 3.3.1 Bid Security��93 3.3.2 Time for Completion��94 3.3.3 Terms of Payment��94 Compliance with Technical Requirements��94 3.4.1 Technical Deviations��94 3.4.2 Construction Schedule and Sequence of Construction Activities��95 3.4.3 Construction Methods��96 3.4.4 Construction Equipment��96 3.4.5 Site Organization and Key Field Personnel��97 3.4.6 Subcontracting��97 3.4.7 Labor, Materials, and Cash Flow��97 3.4.8 Construction Facilities��97 Clarifications��98 89 90 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION 4. Detailed Evaluation of Price Bids��98 4.1 Selection of Bids for Detailed Evaluation��98 4.2 Arithmetic Check and Corrections��99 4.3 Adjustments for Commercial Terms and Conditions................................................................................................. 99 4.4 Adjustments for Technical Requirements��99 4.5 Analysis of Prices�� 100 5. Determination of Lowest Evaluated Bid��100 5.1 Lowest Evaluated Bid�� 100 5.2 Examination of Unbalanced Prices for Lowest Evaluated Bid�� 100 5.3 Reasonableness of Lowest Evaluated Bid Price�� 101 6. Conclusions and Recommendations��101 Appendixes 1 Record of Bid Opening...........................................................................................................................................................102 2 Basic Data Sheet�� 105 3 Examination of Bids�� 106 4 Time for Completion of Major Work Items and Assessment of Construction Methods�� 107 5 Substantial Responsiveness of Bids (Commercial)�� 108 6 Comparison of Construction Equipment�� 111 7 Subcontracting�� 113 8 Payment Schedule (Bidder No. 6)�� 114 9 Construction Facilities (Bidder No. 6)�� 115 10 Summary of Bid Prices (Arithmetic Corrections and Corrected Bid Prices)�� 116 11 Prices for Sections of the Work and as Percentages of the Total Bid Prices (in LC) �� 117 12 Bid Price Comparison with Price Adjustments (Engineer’s Estimate vs Proposal of Bidder No.6)..........118 CIVIL WORKS BID DATA CONTRACT SHEET 1. Introduction 1.1 General The prequalification of contractors for this Project was carried out in accordance with the Asian Development Bank (ADB) procedures in October xxxx.Twenty contractors and joint ventures were prequalified with approval of ADB. The invitation for Bids was issued to all prequalified contractors/ joint ventures on 30 April 20xx. The site visit and pre-bid meeting were held on 2 and 3 June 20xx at xxxxxx and the Project site. Fifteen contractors, out of the twenty prequalified contractors, purchased the bidding documents and attended the pre-bid meeting. The minutes of the pre-bid meeting were prepared and sent to all the contractors who purchased the bidding documents. No addendum to the bidding documents was necessary as the result of pre-bid meeting. 1.2 Submission of Bids The date and time for the submission of bids were not extended and the reception of bids by xxxxxx was closed at 10 a.m. local time on 1 August 20xx as scheduled in the Invitation for Bids. Out of fifteen prequalified contractors who purchased the bidding documents, nine contractors submitted bids. 1.3 Bid Opening Bids were opened as specified in the bidding documents at 10.30 am on 1 August 20xx at the meeting room, fourth floor of xxxxxx head office by the Bid Opening Committee in the presence of representatives of bidders. The bidders’ names, the amount of bid prices, the presence or absence of bid security and its amount were announced and recorded. The Record of Bid Opening was prepared soon after the bids were announced and a copy of the Record of Bid Opening was forwarded to ADB under cover of xxxxxx’s letter dated 6 August 2006. A copy is attached as Appendix 1. 1.4 Basic Data and Exchange Rates The exchange rates used for the evaluation were the selling rates officially prescribed for similar transactions by the Central Bank on 1 August 20xx (i.e. date of bid opening). Basic information pertaining to the bidding is summarized and attached as Appendix 2. 1.5 Bid Evaluation Committee A Bid Evaluation Committee comprising four senior officers of xxxxxx was established by the Director General. Assistance was provided by the staff of the Planning Department of xxxxxx and the project consultants. The Bid Evaluation Committee members were (1) (2) (3) (4) Chairman Member Member Member/Secretary Project Director Director, Engineering Department Legal Adviser Director, Planning Department 91 92 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION The Committee’s decisions were made on the basis of unanimous views and in case a unanimous decision could not be reached on certain issues, the issues were referred to the Director General for decision. 2. Examination of Bids Bid Documents. The bids submitted were first examined to check whether the bidders had submitted all the documents and information required by the bidding documents. The areas covered by the examination were: (i) Form of Bid and Bill of Quantities; (ii) Bid Security; (iii) Schedules of Particular Information; (iv) Joint Venture Agreement, if required; (v) Propriety of Signature and Power of Attorney; (vi) Completeness; (vii) Documents establishing the eligibility of bidders and goods; and (viii) Documents required to assess the postqualification of bidders. The record of checking for completeness of bid documents is attached as Appendix 3. Only four bidders (No.1, No.4. No.6, and No.9) had submitted all documents and information required by the bidding documents. The remaining bidders did not submit complete information on construction methods and sequence of major structures; however, the deficiency is considered to be minor. Bidder No.5 did not attach important information in respect to cash flow tabulation and the breakdown of lump sum price items. However, no further action was taken on this matter as the bid price of Bidder No.5 was ranked seventh. 2.2 Bid Validity and Bid Security A bid validity period of at least 120 days from the date of bid opening was specified in the bidding documents. All bidders offered a bid validity period as required. All bidders submitted bid securities in the form of a Bank guarantee and fulfilled the requirements in the amount, terms and period of validity except Bidder No. 8. 2.3 Propriety of Signature and Power of Attorney Bid documents of all bidders were satisfactory in this aspect as all bid documents were signed properly as per the instructions to Bidders and all corrections were initialed by the authorized person. The power of attorney for each signatory was acceptable. The results of these examinations are shown in Appendix 3. CIVIL WORKS BID DATA CONTRACT SHEET 3.Determination of Substantial Responsiveness of Bids 3.1 Eligibility of Bidders and Goods The bidding documents required, in Clause 4 of the Instructions to Bidders, that each bidder submits with its bid evidence of its eligibility concerning its nationality. All bidders submitted certifications, which indicated that they were nationals of an eligible member country, and offered goods originating in an eligible member country of ADB. Further, all bidders certified that they were not involved in the consulting services for the works (See Appendix 5, Attachment 1 Details on Eligibility of Bidders). 3.2 Bidders’ Qualifications The updated information regarding financial capacity and Technical capability of all bidders was examined. All bidders submitted the completed forms provided with the bidding documents, such as listings of current workload, changes in financial capacity, and availability of construction equipment and key professional personnel. (a)Bidder No.1 had obtained two relatively small contracts recently with a total value equivalent to about $25 million. The bidder’s bid capacity has slightly decreased, but was still found to be satisfactory. Overall, the financial position of the firm remained satisfactory. (b)Because of the short period between prequalification and bidding, only minor changes in the submissions of the other bidders had occurred. None of those changes were, however, of such importance that they would inhibit the bidders’ ability to satisfactorily execute the contract, if awarded. Using the criteria and minimum requirements established during prequalification, all bidders continued to exceed the minimum point scores used in the original evaluation. 3.3 Compliance with Commercial Terms and Conditions 3.3.1 Bid Security1 The amount of the bid security of Bidder No.8 was equivalent to 1.95% of their bid price and did not satisfy fully the specified requirement of a minimum of 2% of the bid price. After due consideration of all relevant factors, in particular fairness to the bidder and all other bidders, it was concluded that the failure to submit a bid security in the required amount should be considered a minor deviation because the security furnished provided sufficient protection against default. However, the bidder was asked to furnish an additional security to cover the difference. The bidder was requested to do so on 10 August 20xx and the additional security was received on 15 August 20xx. 1 The assessment of deviations on bid security shall be in accordance with the provisions of the bidding document issued specifically for the contract. 93 94 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION 3.3.2 Time for Completion A check on the times for completion was carried out on the construction schedule submitted by each of the bidders. The times for completion of the various major work components were analyzed to check (i) whether they are logical and (ii) whether completion times comply with the schedules and are interlinked to satisfy other supply and installation contracts for the Project. Appendix 5 shows the times for completion of the major work components of the Project. In several major work components, some bidders did not meet the requirements. However, these differences were not considered substantial. 3.3.3 Terms of Payment Most of the bidders accepted the commercial provisions of the bidding documents, except that Bidders Nos. 3, 5, and 7 proposed substitution of the retention money to be held during the defects liability period with a Bank guarantee. The deviation from the terms of the bidding documents was not considered to be substantive, and an adjustment of the bid price was not required. Appendix 5 shows a summary of the evaluation of Substantial Responsiveness of Bids (Commercial Terms and Conditions). 3.4 Compliance with Technical Requirements The Bid Evaluation Committee reviewed compliance with the requirements for the submission of bids, which included: completion of the Bill of Quantities; the construction schedule; construction methods and sequence; proposed construction equipment and a schedule for delivery to the works site; a detailed description of proposed site organization; and a schedule for the mobilization of management, engineering and administrative personnel, and of skilled and unskilled labor. All bidders submitted the formal requirements as stipulated in the bidding documents. 3.4.1 Technical Deviations (a) None of the bids contained substantial Technical deviations. Bidder No. 1 proposed to carry out the tunnel excavation by tunnel boring machine (TBM). In the Technical specifications the excavation for tunneling is specified to be carried out by drilling and blasting. If the supporting systems installed after excavation by TBM are constructed similar to that specified for the drilling and blasting method, the excavation by TBM Is considered to be acceptable. Bidder No. 6 proposed to use precast prestressed concrete roof girders instead of cast in situ reinforced concrete girders as specified for the powerhouse. (b) Bidder No.6 deviated from the specifications for the powerhouse. The bidder proposed to use precast prestressed concrete roof girders instead of cast in situ reinforced concrete girders as specified. During the bid clarification meetings, it was established that the bidder’s proposal CIVIL WORKS BID DATA CONTRACT SHEET was unacceptable because precast girders could not be put into place without subjecting the walls to horizontal stresses for which they were not designed and which they might not withstand. The bidder agreed to comply with the specifications but indicated that a reasonable additional cost would need to be negotiated at the time of contract award. The bid was not rejected as this deviation from the specifications was considered as minor. 3.4.2 Construction Schedule and Sequence of Construction Activities The construction schedules and sequences of construction activities proposed by the three lowest bidders were evaluated in detail. The construction schedules submitted were generally consistent with the schedule in the bidding documents. A number of minor inconsistencies were discussed and the necessary changes agreed in the event that a contract were to be awarded. However, finalization was left to contract negotiations with the successful bidder. The findings were as follows (a) Bidder No. 6 In the bidder’s construction schedule: (i) concrete lining periods for the headrace tunnel, cable tunnel and tailrace tunnel were deemed to be short; and (ii) concrete work for the tailrace outlet could be constructed only after excavation of the tailrace tunnel. These could be adjusted easily when the construction CPM is prepared for the contract agreement. (b) Bidder No. 3 In the bidder’s construction schedule, the hollowing work activities were not clearly shown: (i) drilling for drainage holes in the work for tunnel No.1; and (ii) excavation and concrete work for the drainage tunnel. However, these are not substantial deficiencies. (c) Bidder No. 4 In the bidder’s construction schedule, the following works were not clearly shown: (i) river diversion works for the intake daam and right bank of the river; and (iii) invert concrete of the access tunnel to be constructed after completion of the installation of generating equipment. These can be adjusted easily in the overall construction schedule. 95 96 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION 3.4.3 Construction Methods The construction methods proposed by the three bidders were reviewed and evaluated in detail. Overall, the bidders’ proposed construction methods were acceptable. The following were the findings of the review. (a) Bidder No. 6 The bidder proposed the following construction methods, which were considered acceptable: (i) mucking transport on rail for excavation of the main part of the headrace tunnel and of the section from the tailrace outlet to the Work Adit No.3; and (ii) the traditional method of excavation and the use of suitable equipment for personnel and construction material movements, and the lifting of excavated material for the construction of the cable tunnel. (b) Bidder No. 3 In the bidder’s construction methods, activities for the following works were not clearly mentioned: (i) care of water or river diversion at check dam site during construction of the intake dam and check dam; (ii) consolidation grouting in surge tank; and (iii) location of the temporary overhead crane for concreting works in the powerhouse. Clarifications were requested from the bidder. Its replies were satisfactory. (c) Bidder No. 4 The presentation of the construction methods provided by this bidder was considered relatively poor compared with the other two bidders. The following were discussed: (i) the location of the temporary overhead crane for concreting works in the powerhouse was not in suitable place and should be relocated. (ii) care of water or river diversion at the check dam site during construction of the intake dam and check dam were not shown; and (iii) consolidation grouting around the surge tank was not clearly mentioned. However, additional information provided by the bidder was clear and acceptable. 3.4.4 Construction Equipment Mobilization of construction equipment, particularly construction equipment for underground works, is important for the successful completion of this Project. While there were a great number of differences between the equipment schedules submitted by the three bidders, all of them were consistent and CIVIL WORKS BID DATA CONTRACT SHEET compatible with the proposed construction methods and construction schedules. Proposals for construction equipment by all three bidders were considered to be complete and acceptable. The Executing Agency’s estimated construction equipment required for the works and the list of equipment proposed by Bidder No.6 are presented as Appendix 8. 3.4.5 Site Organization and Key Field Personnel Site organization and key field personnel proposed by the three bidders were evaluated in detail with respect to their proposed positions in the site organization, their age, education attained, and experience. The site organization and key personnel proposed by all three bidders were generally acceptable. No serious deficiency was noted in the scrutiny. However, in the proposal of Bidder No.6. the number of foreign engineers for underground works was considered to be less than necessary and, therefore, additional input of foreign engineers in the early state of construction works would be required. Some modifications in detail were discussed and these matters would be finalized during contract negotiations with the bidder, if successful. 3.4.6 Subcontracting The scope of the subcontracts proposed by each bidder was reviewed and was found to be within the limits established in the bidding documents. The experience of each individual subcontractor was determined by reference to the bid submissions, in part in the bid documents, and partly during the bid clarification meetings. Details of the subcontractors proposed by the three bidders are shown in Appendix 9. 3.4.7 Labor, Materials and Cash Flow All three bidders submitted their proposed schedules for labor, major materials (such as cement, reinforcing steel, structural steel, explosives, diesel fuel, etc.) and cash flow. The proposals were reviewed with their construction methods and construction program. The proposals have minor inconsistencies but generally were considered satisfactory. The payment schedule (cash flow) of Bidder No. 6 is attached as Appendix 10. 3.4.8 Construction Facilities The construction facilities proposed by the three bidders were evaluated and the results of Bidder No. 6 are shown in Appendix 11. Overall, all three bidders’ proposals are satisfactory. The following are the findings of the detailed scrutiny: (a) Bidder No. 6 In the bidder’s proposal of construction facilities, the following matters needed clarification: (i) General location map of construction facilities was not submitted; 97 98 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION (ii) Water supply system for the camp area was not clearly mentioned; and (iii) Telecommunication system was not mentioned. Clarifications were requested and the replies were satisfactory. (b) Bidder No. 3 In the bidder’s proposal of construction facilities, the following matters were not clearly addressed: (i) Location and details of explosive storage; (ii) Estimation of quantity of available aggregate from underground excavated materials; and (iii) Production program of concrete for two sets of concrete batching plants at the intake dam area and the Work Adit No. 5 area, on a monthly basis so as to determine each plant’s capacity. Clarifications were sought and the information furnished by the bidder was satisfactory. (c) Bidder No. 4 In the bidder’s proposal of construction facilities, the following matters were not clearly mentioned: (i) Water supply system and electrical power supply system for offices, camps and construction sites; (ii) Appropriateness of proposed location of aggregate plant in case available quantities of SG 7 – sand and gravel borrow areas are not adequate; and (iii) Production schedule of aggregate on a monthly basis to determine the plant capacity. Clarifications were requested and the bidder’s replies were satisfactory. 3.5 Clarifications As mentioned previously, bidders were requested for clarifications to obtain further information in order to establish their capability to carry out the Work. The Committee did not ask for clarifications which may have led to a change in the substance of a bid. Clarifications requested by the Committee and the replies by bidders were made in writing and these documents were properly recorded and held with the respective original bid documents of the bidder. 4. Detailed Evaluation of Price Bids 4.1 Selection of Bids for Detailed Evaluation As discussed in Section 3 of this Report, all bids submitted by the nine bidders were determined as substantially responsive to the bidding documents. The ranking in order of the lowest bid price is as follows. CIVIL WORKS BID DATA CONTRACT SHEET Sr. No. Name of Bidder As Opened (LC) Arithmetically Corrected (LC) Ranking Variation 1 Bidder No. 6 120,801,821 120,804,798 1 - 2 Bidder No. 3 133,049,215 133,087,644 2 10.17% 3 Bidder No. 4 140,260,769 140,267,692 3 16.10% 4 Bidder No. 8 154,064,446 154,064,446 4 27.53% 5 Bidder No. 1 161,190,283 161,191,644 5 33.43% 6 Bidder No. 9 161,388,798 161,388,797 6 33.77% 7 Bidder No. 5 168,443,268 168,467,180 7 39.46% 8 Bidder No. 7 172,807,355 172,807,355 8 43.05% 9 Bidder No. 2 196,915,693 196,958,318 9 63.30% In order to reduce the volume of work involved in the detailed evaluation, it was decided to evaluate initially only the three lowest bids. Other bids would be evaluated only if adjustments, if any, to be made to the three lowest bids would bring their adjusted price above the unadjusted price of any of the other bids. Accordingly, only bids Nos. 6, 3, and 4 were initially evaluated and, since the adjusted prices of all three bids were lower than the unadjusted price of any of the other bids, detailed evaluation of the higher bids was not necessary. 4.2 Arithmetic Check and Corrections Each bid was checked for arithmetic errors in accordance with the provisions of the bidding documents and such errors were corrected. These corrections, none of which were substantial, were tabulated and are shown in Appendix 6: Table of Summary of Bid Prices (Arithmetic Corrections and Corrected Bid Prices). The results of the arithmetic check on the three lowest bids were also confirmed by the bidders. 4.3 Adjustments for Commercial Terms and Conditions All three lowest bidders accepted the commercial provisions of the bidding documents. Therefore, no price adjustments for commercial terms and conditions were necessary (see Appendix 7, Bid Price Comparison). 4.4 Adjustments for Technical Requirements (a) B idder No.6 deviated from the specifications for the powerhouse. While the deviation from the specifications was considered as minor, the project consultants estimated that the cost of precast prestressed concrete roof girders is LC286,500.00 cheaper than the cost of cast in situ reinforced concrete as specified. To be fair to other bidders it was decided to load the bid price of Bidder No. 6 by LC286,500.00 for bid evaluation purposes (see Appendix 7, Bid Price Comparison). In the event of award of contract to Bidder No.6 an appropriate amount would be negotiated. 99 100 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION (b) Bidders Nos. 3 and 4 appeared to have deviated from the specifications on some minor details but were found to be in compliance after reviewing these details during the bid clarification meetings. As a result, adjustments to the bid prices were not required. 4.5 Analysis of Prices As a guide to the examination of prices quoted in the bids, prices quoted for each Section of the Work were computed, as defined in the Bill of Quantities, as a percentage of the total bid price and compared with the percentages of each bid and also with the corresponding percentages of the Executing Agency’s estimate. The comparison is shown in Appendix 12. On the basis of this review, thorough discussions were held with the bidders, particularly the lowest bidder (Bidder No. 6 ). After these discussions with the bidders, the Committee was satisfied that the bidders had fully understood the requirements for the Work and the specifications governing materials and construction processes, and that they were prepared to carry out the Work as specified in the bidding documents. Despite the differences in pricing of the various sections of the Work, the Committee did not find any instances of intentionally unbalancing the bill. 5. Determination of Lowest Evaluated Bid 5.1 Lowest Evaluated Bid The corrected and adjusted prices for the three bids which were evaluated in detail are shown in Appendix 13. As that comparison shows, the lowest evaluated substantially responsive bid is that submitted by Bidder No. 6 for a total evaluated bid price of LC121,091,298 equivalent. The JV’s proposal of Japanese Yen 1,477,007,901 in foreign currency, which represents about 32% of the total bid price, was considered reasonable. 5.2 Examination of Unbalanced Prices for Lowest Evaluated Bid Comparison of unit rates and prices, particularly early work items, of the lowest evaluated bid with average rates of the other two lowest bids and the Executing Agency’s estimate were carried out. 5.2.1 High Unit Rates and Prices A unit rate or price is considered high if it is 50%, higher than the average of two bids and the Executing Agency’s estimate. There are high unit rates and prices in the lowest bid, however, none of these items exceeds an amount of more than 1% of the total bid price. In addition, the total amount of items with high unit rates and prices of the lowest bidder is only 3.4% of its total bid price. (a) High Unit Rates and Prices in Early Work Items. Those work items which were to be carried out in the first eight months are considered as early work items. Several items, mainly diversion and coffering works for the intake dam and tailrace outlet were evaluated as CIVIL WORKS BID DATA CONTRACT SHEET high unit rates and prices, but the total value of these items is about 09 % of the total bid price. From the above results of the review, the lowest bid should not be considered as an unbalanced bid in respect of early work items. (b) High Unit Rates and Prices for Other Items The total amount of high unit rates and prices in other work items is about 2.5% of the bid price. However, none of the items exceed 1% of the total bid price. The corresponding work quantities stated in the Bill of Quantities of key items were checked and found to be calculated correctly. Detailed checking showed that the items involved are minor work items and the quantities of these items were unlikely to be increased significantly thus the lowest bid should also be considered as a balanced bid. 5.3 Reasonableness of Lowest Evaluated Bid Price The lowest evaluated bid, submitted by Bidder No. 6, is about 19% lower than the Executing Agency’s estimate. The unit prices of open works were rather low compared with other works of a similar nature in the country but the underground works were almost of a similar price as in other projects. Thus, it was considered that the bid of the lowest evaluated bidder is not substantially low and the Committee was confident that the lowest evaluated bidder would be able to complete the Work in accordance with the specifications and the construction schedule. 6. Conclusions and Recommendations On the basis of the systematic evaluation of bids as presented in this report, it was concluded that the bid of Bidder No. 6 was the lowest evaluated substantially responsive bid. Therefore, it was recommended that the Contract for Lot 1 Civil Works, xxxxxx be awarded to Bidder No. 6 for the contract amount of LC81.991.984.40 and Japanese Yen 1,477,007,901.00 (LC 120,804,798.00 equivalent) plus an additional cost for the change from the proposed precast prestressed concrete girders to cast in situ R.C. girders as specified for the powerhouse. This additional cost would be negotiated with the bidder, however, the cost would not be more than LC286,500.00 as discussed in paragraph 4.3.1 of this Report. 101 102 Appendix 1 Page 1 of 3 Record of Bid Opening Loan No. xxxx-xxx Project Title: xxxxxx Bid No. 20/xxx/06 (ICB) Contract Title: LOT 1 Civil Works. 1. The following bids were received by the close of bidding on 1 August 2006 at 10 a.m. (local time) and were publicly opened and read at 10:30 a.m. on the same date. Name of Bidder No. and Nationality Bid Security Amount Foreign Currency (FC) Local Currency (LC) 1 Bidder No. I $1,650,000.00 $29,755,563.00 93,377,354.90 Signed 2 Bidder No.2 $1,950,000.00 FF239.793.677.40 82,150,439.50 Signed 3 Bidder No. 3 Y126,000,000.00 Y1,904,999,010.00 82,989,651.40 Signed 4 Bidder No. 4 MK3.150,000.00 $27,041,671.80 78,632,798.60 Signed 5 Bidder No. 5 Y145.000,000.00 Y2,984,560,000.00 90,015,000.00 Signed 6 Bidder No. 6 Y125.000,000.00 Y1,477,007,041.00 81,989,030.40 Signed 7 Bidder No. 7 $1,950,000.010 $36,354,010.00 89,956,566.50 Signed 8 Bidder No. 8 MK3,010,000.00 $40,168,801.00 62,519,748.80 Signed 9 Bidder No. 9 $1,800,000.00 FF160,632,595.10 84,510,037.50 Signed Discounts Offered Signature of Bidders’ Rep. 103 Page 2 of 3 2. The following bidders’ representatives attended the public opening of bids and a copy of the attendance sheet is attached as an annexure of this record. No. Name 1 Mr. xxxxx Designation Area Manager S.E. Asia Office Bidder No. 3 2 Mr. xxxxx Chief Engineer Bidder No. 1 3 Mr. xxxxx Vice President Bidder No. 6 4 Mr. xxxxx Manager International Marketing 5 Mr. xxxxx 6 Mr. xxxxx Mr. xxxxx Mr. xxxxx Mr. xxxxx Bidder No.9 Manager Regional Office 9 Bidder No. 2 Chief Engineer Construction 8 Bidder No. 5 General Manager xxx Branch 7 Bidder No. 4 Vice President Asia Pacific Operation Bidder No. 7 Deputy Director Operations 3. Bidding Company Represented Bidder No. 8 Reading and Signing of document, ended at 13:15 hrs. Signed Member Director, Planning Department Signed Chairman Project Director Signed Member Legal Adviser 104 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION Page 3 of 3 Attendance Sheet for Opening of Bids Loan No. xxx-xxx Bid No. 20/xxx/06 (ICB) Place: Meeting Room. Fourth Floor, xxxxxx Project title : xxxxxx Contract Title: LOT1 Civil Works. Date: 1 August 2006; Time 10:30hrs. The following bidders’ representatives attended the public opening of bids. No. Bidder Representative 1 Bidder No. 3 Mr. xxxxxx Designation Area Manager Signature Signed S.E. Asia Office 2 Bidder No. 1 Mr. xxxxxx Chief Engineer Signed 3 Bidder No. 6 Mr. xxxxxx Vice President Signed 4 Bidder No. 4 Mr. xxxxxx Manager Signed International Marketing 5 Bidder No. 5 Mr. xxxxxx Vice President Signed Asia Pacific Operations 6 Bidder No. 2 Mr. xxxxxx General Manager Signed xxx Branch 7 Bidder No. 9 Mr. xxxxxx Chief Engineer Signed Construction 8 Bidder No. 7 Mr. xxxxxx Manager Signed Regional Office 9 Bidder No. 8 Mr. xxxxxx Deputy Director Operations Signed 105 Appendix 2 Basic Data Sheet 1 Project Title XXXXXX 2 Loan Number xxxx-xxx 3 Bid/Contract Title LOT 1Civil Works 4 Bid/Contract Number 20/xxx/06 (ICB) 5 Estimated Value/Engineer’s Estimate LC 152,917,466.00 6 Date Invitation For Bids Issued 30 April 20xx 7 Method of Procurement International Competitive Bidding Bidding Procedure Single-Stage: One-Envelope 8 Bid Closing Date and Time 10 a.m.. on 1 August 20xx 9 Bid Opening Date and Time 10:30 a.m. on 1 August 20xx 10 Number of Bids Received Nine (9) bids 11 Bid Validity Expires on 28 November 20xx 12 Bid Security Amount Not less than 2% of the Bid Price 13 Bid Security Validity Expires On 26 December 20xx 14 Date for Determining Applicable Exchange Rates 15 Exchange Rates for Evaluation 1 August 20xx (Date of Bid Opening) US Dollar 1 LC 2.2790 Japanese Yen 100 = LC 2.6278 French Franc I LC 0.4786 Source: The selling exchange rates of Central Bank of xxxxxxx. 106 Appendix 3 Examination of Bids Bidder No. Item Description 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 Bid Documents 1 l One original and two copies Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 1.2 Form of Bid Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 1.3 Appendix to Bid Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 1.4 Priced Bill of Quantities Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 1.5 Bid Security (amount and validity period) Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 1.6 Schedule of Particular Information 1) Construction Time Schedule Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 2) Construction Method Y P Y Y Y Y P P Y 3) List of Construction Equipment Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 4) Organization and Field Personnel Y N Y Y P Y P Y P 5) Subcontracting Y Y Y Y N Y Y N N 6) Mobilization and Temporary/ Y Y Y Y Y Y P Y P Y Y Y Y Y Y N N Y Y Y Y Y P Y P Y P NA Y Y Y Y Y NA NA Y Construction Facilities 7) Cash Flow 1.7 Drawings and Documents (to be submitted with bid). 1.8 Joint Venture Agreement or Formal Intent to Enter into an Agreement (if Bidder is a joint venture) 2 Propriety of Signature and Completeness 2.1 Power of Attorney submitted or not Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 2.2 Bid Form properly signed or not Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 2.3 Completeness of Bids Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y = Yes; N = No; P = Partial; NA = Not Applicable Note: Provide details if “P,” “N,” or “NA” 107 Appendix 4 Time for Completion of Major Work Items and Assessment of Construction Methods Periods for Completion (months) Item No. Employer Program Particulars Bidder No.3 Bidder No.4 Bidder No.6 1 Intake Dam 37 37 Y 27 Y 30 Y 2 Intake Facilities 47 47 Y 32 Y 38 Y 3 Headrace Drain Tunnel 55 55 Y 45 Y 55 Y 4 Penstock Tunnel 45 45 Y 45 Y 43 Y 5 Tailrace Chamber and Outlet 56 56 Y 53 Y 56 Y 6 Deregulation Dam 38 38 Y 31 Y 28 Y 7 Powerhouse O.H. Crane Installation 45 45 Y 45 Y 39 Y 8 Powerhouse for Turbine/Generator Installation 51 NC - 47 Y NC - 9 Powerhouse for Transformer Installation 51 NC - 51 Y 45 Y 10 Control Room for Control Equipment Installation 50 50 Y NC 45 Y 11 Cable Tunnel 51 51 Y 51 Y 51 Y 12 Outdoor Switchyard 48 48 Y 48 Y 38 Y 13 Main Control House 50 50 Y 50 Y 50 Y 14 Intake Dam Control House 51 50 Y 51 Y 40 Y 15 Regulating Darn Control House 55 54 Y 54 Y 54 Y 16 Completion of Whole Works 60 60 Y 60 Y 60 Y Item No. Construction Methods Findings 1 Logic of Construction Schedule A A A 2 Feasibility of Achieving Schedule A AA AA 3 Assessment of Construction Method A A A Note: Y = Within Specified months NC = Not Shown Clearly A = Acceptable AA = Marginally Acceptable 108 Appendix 5 Substantial Responsiveness of Bids (Commercial) Sr. No. 1 Requirements Power of Attorney 2 Signature on Documents 3 Joint Venture Agreement or Letter of Intent to Enter into an Agreement Eligibility Section 1, (a)Bidder and Sub contractor Clause 4 (See (b)Bidder Affiliated with Attachment to this Consultant Appendix) (c) Material and Equipment Clause 5 Bid Validity(120 days) Section 1, Clause 18 Section 2, ITB 18.1 4 5 6 7 8 Bid Security (a) Amount and Validity (b) Format and Terms Time for Competition Terms of Payment (a) Advance Payment (15%) (b) Retention Money (10%) (c) Price Adjustment 9 10 11 Liquidated Damages (a) Rate (0 5% per week) (b) Maximum Limit (10%) Defects Liability Period (12 months) Performance Security (10%) Section 1, Clause 19 Section 2, ITB 19.1 Section 8, Clause 1.1.3.3 Section 7, Clause 14, Section 8, Ref. GCC 14.2 Section 8, Ref. GCC 13.8 Section 8, Ref. GCC 8.7 and 14.15 (b) Section 7, Clause 4 Section 8, Clause 1.1.3.7 Section 8, Ref. GCC 4.2 FINDINGS C = Complied PC = Partially Complied 1 State reason 2 3 4 Bidder No. 5 6 7 8 9 C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C NA NA C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C PC1 C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C PC1 C C C PC1 C C C PC1 C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C R R R R R R R R R Bidding Doc. Reference 1 Section 1, Clause 20.2 Section 2, ITB 20.2 C Section 1, C Clause 20.2 Section 1, NA Clause 4.1 NA = Not Applicable R = Substantially Responsive NC = Not Complied Conflict of Interest Declared Ineligible by ADB 4 Suppliers must be nationals of an eligible ADB member country. Proposed subcontractors or Bidder must be a national of an eligible ADB member country. 3 2 Single Entity or Joint Venture 1 If Joint Venture, all partners must be jointly and severally liable. Requirements No. Section 1, Clause 4.4 Section 1, Clause 4.3 Section 1, Clause 4.2 Section 1, Clause 4.1 Bidding Documents Reference No None (all from eligible ADB member countries) X X (Country Name) Single Entity Bidder No. 1 No None (all from eligible ADB member countries) X XX and XXX Partners are jointly and severally liable Joint Venture Bidder No. 2 No None (all from eligible ADB member countries) XXXX XXXX Single Entity No None (all from eligible ADB member countries) XXXX XXXX Single Entity Bidder No. Bidder No. 3 4 No None (all from eligible ADB member countries) X XXX Single Entity Bidder No. 5 No None (all from eligible ADB member countries) XXX XX/XXX Partners are jointly and severally liable Joint Venture Bidder No. 6 Details on Eligibility of Bidders No None (all from eligible ADB member countries) XX XX Single Entity Bidder No. 7 No None (all from eligible ADB member countries) XXXXX XXXXX Single Entity Bidder No. 9 continued on next page No None (all from eligible ADB member countries) XX XXXXX Single Entity Bidder No. 8 Attachment 1 CIVIL WORKS BID DATA CONTRACT SHEET 109 Requirements Governmentowned enterprise in Employer’s country to be legally and financially autonomous, operate under commercial law, and not dependent agency of the Employer. Not having been declared ineligible based on a United Nations resolution. No. 5 6 Table continued Section 1, Clause 4.7 Section 1, Clause 4.5 Bidding Documents Reference Not declared ineligible Not a govt. owned enterprise Bidder No. 1 Not declared ineligible Not a govt. owned enterprise Bidder No. 2 Not declared ineligible Not a govt. owned enterprise Not declared ineligible Not a govt. owned enterprise Bidder No. Bidder No. 3 4 Not declared ineligible Not a govt. owned enterprise Bidder No. 5 Not declared ineligible Not a govt. owned enterprise Bidder No. 6 Not declared ineligible Govt. owned enterprise legally and financially autonomous, and not a dependent agency of the Employer Bidder No. 7 Not declared ineligible Not a govt. Bidder No. 8 Not declared ineligible Not a govt. Bidder No. 9 110 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION 111 Appendix 6 Page 1 of 2 Comparison of Construction Equipment (Engineer’s Estimate vs Proposal of Bidder No. 6) Engineer’s Estimate Item Particulars Bidder No. 6 Capacity Nos. Capacity Nos. 2 32 t 1 1 Earth Moving 1.1 Bulldozer 32t 1.2 Bulldozer 15/25t 5 15/25 t 1.3 Backhoe 3 1. 2 m 2 1.5 m 1.4 Backhoe 3 0.7 m 2 0.7/1.2 m 4 1.5 Wheel Loader 2.3 m 4 2.5 m 2 1.6 Dump Truck 11t 24 11t 20 1.7 Pneumatic Crawler Drill 100kg 2 150kg 2 1.8 Portable Air Compressor 10.5m3/min 2 3 5 m /min 3 2 Transportation 2.1 Low Bed Semi-trailer 30t 1 20t 1 2.2 Cargo Truck 8t 4 4.8t 3 2.3 Water Sprinkler Truck 6kl 2 6kl 2 2.4 Hydraulic Crane 20 t 1 20t 1 2.5 Motor Grader 150 kW 2 150 kW 1 3 Tunnel Work 3.1 Drill Jumbo - 2 - boom 5 55 kW 2 3.2 Conveyor Type Loader 40m /h 4 4.5t 3.3 Side Dump Wheel Loader 3 2.3m 2 1.9 m 3.4 Side Dump Wheel Loader 3 1.6m 3.5 Loader Haul Dump 3 3.6 3 3 4 I 3 3 3 3 3 2 1 - 3.8 m 2 3.2 m3 1 Shotcrete Machine 3 6 m /h 6 5.12 m /h 4 3.7 Hydraulic Crawler Drill 180kg 8 110 kW 2 3.8 Air Compressor 3 17 m /min 6 3 18.26 m /min 8 3.9 Dump Truck - - 11t 6 3 112 Appendix 6 Page 2 of 2 Engineers Estimate Item Particulars Bidder No.6 Capacity Nos. Capacity Nos. 4 Drilling and Grouting Work 4.1 Boring Machine 7.5 kW 3 5.5 kW 4 42 Grout Pump 11 kW 6 18.5 kW 2 4.3 Grout Pump 7.5 kW 2 7.5 kW 4 4.4 Grout Mixer 200 L 8 200 L 4 5 Aggregate Production 5.1 Crushing Plant 105 ton/h 1 Set 40 t/h 2 6 Concrete Production and Handling 6.1 Concrete Mixing Plant 36/48 m3/hr 2 Sets 30/50 m3/hr 2 Sets 6.2 Truck Mixer 4.5 m /hr 16 3 6 m /hr 8 6.3 Concrete Pump Truck 80 m /hr 6 - - 6.4 Concrete Bucket 1.5 m 2 - 6.5 Truck Crane 30 t 1 - 6.6 Concrete Pump 7 Other Plant and Equipment 7.1 Engine Generator 3 3 3 Comment: Satisfactory, however, Drill Jumbo is not adequate for Tunnel Work. - 60-70 m /hr 4 100 450 kVA 15 3 - 113 Appendix 7 Subcontracting Work to be Subcontracted Bidder No. 3 6 Work Item Estimated Value Subcontractor Name Subcontractor No. l Experience Evaluation 4.1 - 4.7 Architectural and Utility Works LC 3,125,000 (a)Sport Shoe Factory Architectural, Mechanical and Electrical Works 5.1 – 5.5 Electrical Works LC 2,250,000 1.2.3 / 001 Piles LC 205,000 1.1.4 / 001 Drilling for Concrete Piles Y 45,508,500 LC 121,200 Subcontractor No. 2 Several Contracts for concrete piling works submitted Acceptable Electrical Works LC 2,400,000 Subcontractor No. 3 (a)xxxxx Power Plant- Piping works and Mechanical and Electrical works (b) xxxxxxx Hydro electric Power Electrical works Acceptable (b)International Trade Center Architectural and Electrical Acceptable 30 projects of drilling works 1.2.3 / 001 4 5.1 - 5 .5 114 Appendix 8 Payment Schedule (Bidder No. 6) Foreign Currency (1000 Yen) Local Currency (1000 LC) Total in (1000 LC) 1-3 First Year 177,840 10,308 14,982 4-6 81,652 5,141 7,287 7-9 83.651 5,475 7,673 10-12 76,307 5,515 7,520 13-15 Second Year 78,960 6,572 8,647 16-18 70,310 5,693 7,541 19-21 73,233 5,976 7,901 22-24 89,160 5,000 7,343 25-27 Third Year 81,674 4,038 6,184 28-30 78,949 3,918 5,993 31-33 74,636 3,300 5,261 34-36 80,948 3,261 5,388 37-39 Fourth Year 78,562 3,064 5,129 40-42 96,041 3,803 6,327 43-45 101,630 4,111 6,782 46-48 89,403 3,361 5,711 49-51 Fifth Year 43,501 2,068 3,211 52-54 16,215 1,082 1,509 55-57 3,240 254 338 .58-60 822 37 59 61-63 Sixth Year 274 12 19 64-66 0 0 0 67-69 0 0 0 69-72 0 0 0 Total 1,477,008 81,990 120,805 Period in Months Comment: Satisfactory: Consistent with Construction Schedule. 115 Appendix 9 Construction Facilities (Bidder No. 6) 1. 2. Aggregate Plant Common Plant (i)Location: between tailrace outlet and re-regulating dam 40t/h capacity (ii) Intake dam area 40t/h capacity (i) 50 m3/h capacity Intake dam area (ii) Inlet of Work Adit No. 5 area 30 m3/h capacity 3. Water Supply System Water supply systems for offices, camps and open air construction are not mentioned; other areas acceptable 4. Power Supply System 15 generators of 100-450 kVA at the different 1nratims of main utilization including for offices, camps etc. 4570 kVA in total 5. Telecommunications System Using VHF radio communication system from the main office to work sites 6. Testing Laboratory Main office, intake dam area and inlet of Work Adit No.5 area with 150,150 and 300m2 respectively 7. Medical Clinic At main office area with 150m2 floor area 8. Offices (i) Main office – near base camp : 900 m2 (ii) Site office – near inlet of access tunnel: 100 m2 (iii)Engineer’s Offices – locations of main construction sites with 50m2 each 9. Camp (i) Staff camp – near base camp : 2080 m2 (ii) Worker’s camp - near tailrace outlet: 3650 m2 10 Workshop Main office area : 210 m2 11. Warehouse Near main office .375 m2 Comment: Acceptable Local Currency (1) Foreign Currency (1) (2) Foreign Currency ¹ Based on the Selling Exchange Rate: ………………………………….. 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Bidder No. (2) Local Currency Arithmetic Correction (3) Foreign Currency (3) Local Currency Discounts (4) = 1 ± 2 - 3 Foreign Currency (4) = 1 ± 2 - 3 Local Currency Corrected Bid Price Total Corrected Bid Price In [Currency of Employer’s Country] Equivalent1 Ranking Summary of Bid Prices (Arithmetic Corrections and Corrected Bid Prices) Bid Price at Opening Appendix 10 116 117 Appendix 11 Prices for Sections of the Work as Percentages of the Total Bid Prices (in Local Currency) Section No. 0 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 2 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9 2.10 3 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 4 5 6 Description General Intake Dam Intake Dam Intake Facilities Check Dam and Drainage Waterway Headrace Tunnel Work Adit No. Headrace Drain Tunnel Penstock Tunnel Work Adit No. 3 Tailrace Chamber Tailrace Tunnel Work Adit No. 4 and 5 Tailrace Outlet Deregulating Dam Power Station Powerhouse Access Tunnel Drain Tunnel Cable Tunnel Work Tunnels 1 and 2 Outdoor Switch yard and Measuring Apparatus Architectural and Utility Work Electrical Work Daywork Total Bidder No. 4 Bidder No. 6 Engineers Estimate % of Total Value Est. 9,209,130 6.0 18,333,401 12.0 9,809,193 6.4 7,553.862 4.9 970,346 0.7 Bidder No. 3 % of Bid Value Price 12,316,101 9.2 17,983,937 13.5 9.497,751 7.1 7,621,343 5.7 864,843 0.7 Value 13,513,615 22,600,249 12,260,671 9.420,896 918,682 % of Bid Price 9.6 16.1 8.7 6.7 0.7 Value 7,973,646 16.068,377 8,548,845 6,784,408 735,124 % of Bid Price 16.6 13.3 7.1 5.6 0.6 75,957,706 21,559,538 50.4 14.1 60,439,350 16.497,668 45.5 12.4 60,312,394 43.1 16,867,186 12.0 59,690,421 16,271,529 49.4 13.5 838,812 1,866,197 0.5 1.2 652,234 1.417.677 0.5 1.1 677,142 1,375 ,131 0.5 1.0 714,353 1,569.841 0.6 1.3 7,021,007 4,535,495 2,770,884 4.6 3.0 1.8 7,407,554 3,559,082 2,643,825 5.6 2.7 2.0 6,359,329 3,601,876 2,526,599 4.6 2.6 1.8 5,497,266 3,558,086 2,139,076 4.5 2.9 1.8 28,376,299 3,948,435 18.6 2.6 20,913.339 2,716,744 15.8 2.0 20,226,765 2,816,024 14.4 2.0 21,623,286 3,310,349 17.9 2.7 1,614,839 4,426,200 1.1 2.9 981,769 3,644,458 0.7 2.7 1,210,571 4,651,771 0.9 3.3 1,407.1656 3,598.999 1.2 3.0 37,821,071 20,264,298 8,445,012 1,002,915 2,569,843 2,648,020 24.7 13.3 5.5 0.7 1.7 1.7 30,793,505 16,414,159 6,198.076 813,393 3,389,238 1,874,008 23.1 12.3 4.7 0.6 2.5 1.4 3,587,834 23.9 19,758,437 14.1 6,150,387 4.4 840,007 0.6 2,630,7 33 1.9 2,127,978 1.5 28,507,341 15,538,506 6,139,315 6,647,457 2,089,904 1,947,299 23.6 12.9 5.1 0.5 l.7 1.6 2,890,983 1.8 2,104,629 1.6 2,080,292 1.4 2,194,860 1.8 7,299,148 4.8 8,364,182 6.3 6,490,238 4.6 5,684,203 4.7 1.5 2,467,616 1.9 2,527,930 1.8 1,699,743 1.4 0.9 1,181,067 100.0 120,804.80 1.0 100.0 2,328,949 968,061 152,917,466 0.6 722,953 100.0 133,087,644 0.5 1,235,432 100.0 140,267,692 1 Ranking Based on selling exchange rates: ....................................... 6 1 for Comparison Converted to LC 5 (2) 1,905,166,590.00 - (b) Technical Sub -Total (2) to (3) - 1,906,166,590.00 1,904,999,010.00 Foreign (Y) (a) Commercial for Deviations Amount to be Adjusted (As Corrected) Bid Price (As Submitted) Including Discounts Bid Price Particulars 133,087,644.60 83,023,676.90 - - 83,023,676.90 82,989,651.40 Local (LC) Bidder No. 3 140,267,692.00 27,043,746.80 - - 27,043,746.80 27,041,671.80 Foreign (US$) (3) 78,634,993.10 - - 78,634,993.10 78,632,798.60 Local(LC) Bidder No. 4 (1) 1,477,007,901.00 - - 1,477,007,901.00 1,477.007,041.00 Foreign (Y) 121,091,298.00 82,278,484.40 286,500.00 - 81,991,984.40 81,989,030.40 Local (LC) Bidder No. 6 Bid Price Comparison with Price Adjustments 4 3 2 1 Sr. No. Appendix 12 118 119 Example 3: Design, Supply, and Installation Contract Two-Stage Bidding Procedure In order to protect the autonomy of the borrowers, executing agencies, and bidders concerned, references to the name of the borrower, the borrower’s country and currency, the executing agency, the name and address of the executing agency and the project site, the names of the bidders and bidder’s representative, the number and title of the ADB loan have been deleted. The borrower, the borrower’s country, the executing agency, the name and address of the executing agency and the project site, the names of bidder’s representatives, and the number and title of the ADB loan have been replaced with combinations of the letter “x” the name of the borrower’s currency has been referred to as “Local Currency (LC),” and the bidders have been identified by number and referred to as “Bidder No. 1,” “Bidder No. 2,” etc. [The Appendixes in this example may not have adopted those recommended in the main text of this Guide as they were based on those of the Guide version available at the time the evaluation reports were prepared.] 120 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION LETTERHEAD OF THE EXECUTING AGENCY Our Reference: 01/ICB/Works/03/20xx 9 April 20xx Director __UW, __RD 6 ADB Avenue, Mandaluyong City 1550, Philippines Subject : Loan No. xxxxxxx: xxxxxx Wastewater Management Project – First Stage Bid Evaluation Report for Designing, Construction, Installation, Rehabilitation and Maintenance of Wastewater Pumping Stations of xxxxxx (XXXX/ADB/PS/01/ICB/Works/03/20xx) Dear Sir, In accordance with the provisions of the loan Agreement, we have invited bids for the above contract following the Two Stage bidding procedure of ADB. We are submitting herewith three (3) copies of the First Stage Bid Evaluation Report (Technical Proposals) for xxxxxx Wastewater Management Project –Designing, Construction, Installation, Rehabilitation and Maintenance of Wastewater Pumping Stations of xxxxxx for ADB’s review and approval. Your early reply to this matter will be appreciated. Sincerely yours, Signed Project Director xxxxxx Attachment: Three copies of Report DESIGN, EVALUATION SUPPLY, AND ANDINSTALLATION QUALIFICATION BID DATA CONTRACT CRITERIA SHEET XXXXXX FIRST STAGE BID EVALUATION REPORT (TECHNICAL PROPOSALS) FOR WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT— DESIGNING, CONSTRUCTION, INSTALLATION, REHABILITATION AND MAINTENANCE OF WASTEWATER PUMPING STATIONS OF XXXXXX BID No. 01/ICB/Works/03/20xx ADB LOAN No. XXXXXXX XXXXXX WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT APRIL 20xx 121 122 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION Contents2 Design, Supply, and Installation Contract 1. Introduction................................................................................................................................................. 124 1.1 General�� 124 1.2 Submission of Bids�� 124 1.3 Bid Opening�� 124 1.4 Basic Data�� 124 1.5 Bid Evaluation Committee�� 125 2. Examination for Completeness of Bids��125 2.1 List of Bidders�� 125 2.2 Bid Documents (Technical Proposal)�� 125 2.3 Propriety of Signature and Power of Attorney�� 126 3. Determination of Substantive Responsiveness of Bids......................................................................... 126 3.1 Eligibility of Bidders and Goods�� 126 3.2 Bidders’ Qualifications�� 126 3.3 Compliance with Commercial Terms and Conditions�� 130 3.3.1 Terms of Payment and Reservations to Commercial Conditions��130 3.3.2 Time for Completion/ Contract Execution Schedule��130 4. Detailed Evaluation for Technical Requirements................................................................................... 131 4.1 Nonresponsive Bids and Responsive Bids�� 131 4.2 Evaluation for Technical Requirements of Responsive Bids�� 131 4.2.1 Bidder No. 3��131 4.2.2 Bidder No. 5��136 4.2.3 Bidder No. 7��139 4.2.4 Bidder No. 8��142 4.2.5 Bidder No. 9��146 4.3 Clarifications and Discussions�� 151 5. Conclusions and Recommendations........................................................................................................ 151 2 Based on October 2010 Edition, Guide on Bid Evaluation. FIRST STAGE BID EVALUATION REPORT Appendixes 1 Record of Bid Opening�� 152 2 Basic Data Sheet�� 155 3 Table 1: Examination of Completeness of Bid Documents...................................................................................156 4 Table 2: Evaluation of Bidders’ Qualifications............................................................................................................157 5 Table 3: Substantive Responsiveness of Bids (Commercial Terms)...................................................................161 6 Table 4: Salient Technical Features of Bids (Technical Proposals).....................................................................163 Attachment Changes Required Pursuant to First Stage Evaluation Bidder No. 3 Bidder No. 5 123 124 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION 1. Introduction 1.1 General The xxxxxxxx has received a loan from the Asian Development Bank (ADB) to finance the cost of implementing the xxxxxxx Wastewater Management Project. It is intended that part of the proceeds of this loan be used for eligible payments for designing, construction installation and rehabilitation of wastewater pumping stations of xxxxxxx Municipal Council for which these bids have been invited. The ADB Two-Stage bidding procedure has been adopted for this procurement. The invitation of bids was advertised on 25 July 20xx in the local newspapers in three languages and in the ADB website on 24 July 20xx. The site visit and pre‑bid meeting were held on 27 August 20xx and 28 August 20xx respectively as stipulated in the bidding documents. Fifteen potential bidders which purchased the bidding documents attended the site visit and pre-bid meeting. The minutes of the pre-bid meeting were prepared and sent to the firms which purchased the bidding documents. As a result of the pre-bid meeting 2 addendums to the bidding documents were issued on 6 September 20xx and on 23 September 20xx respectively to clarify certain aspects of the Technical requirements of the bidding documents. Copies of the addendums were forwarded to ADB when issuing to bidders. 1.2 Submission of Bids The closing time of bid submission was extended till 22 October 20xx at 2 p.m through an addendum. Accordingly the receipt of bids was closed at 2 p.m. local time on 22 October 20xx. Out of fifteen firms which purchased the bidding documents, nine bidders submitted bids.. 1.3 Bid Opening Bids were opened as scheduled in the addendum, at 2 p.m. on 22 October 20xx at the Chief Accountant’s Office of the Ministry of xxxxxxxxxxxxx by the Bid Opening Committee in the presence of representatives of bidders. The bidders’ names were announced and recorded. The Bid Opening Committee opened the envelopes of the Technical proposals and examined the documents. All the necessary papers, forms and schedules were signed by the members of Committee on each of the envelopes. The Record of Bid Opening was prepared soon after the bids were announced. A copy of the record is attached as Appendix 1. 1.4 Basic Data The key information of the bidding process was collected so that it would be readily available. The basic information pertaining to the bidding was summarized and is presented in Appendix 2. FIRST STAGE BID EVALUATION REPORT 1.5 Bid Evaluation Committee A Bid Evaluation Committee (BEC) comprising five senior officers was established by the Executing Agency. The BEC members were: (1) Chairman Additional Secretary (2) Member Chief Accountant (3) Member Mechanical Engineer (4) Member Director (Engineering) (5) Member/Secretary Project Director The Committee decisions have been made on the basis of detailed discussions, and views and the final decision was unanimous. 2. Examination of Bids 2.1 List of Bidders The names of the bidders and their nationalities are shown in the following table. Bidder No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 2.2 Nationality JV: Australia JV: People’s Republic of ChinaIndia People’s Republic of China JV: People’s Republic of China–Malaysia Singapore Republic of Korea Republic of Korea India Bid Documents (Technical Proposal) The Technical proposals submitted were examined to verify that the bidders had submitted all the documents and information required by the bidding documents. The following were verified: (i) Form of Bid for Technical proposal; (ii) Joint Venture Agreement or Letter of Intent to Enter into an Agreement; (iii) Presence of Power of Attorney and Propriety of Signature; (iv) Documents establishing the eligibility of bidders and goods; 125 126 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION (v) Documents required to assess the qualification of bidders, its manufacturers and subcontractors; and (vi)Schedules of particular information and documents required to establish that the plant and services conform to the bidding documents. The results of checking for completeness of bid documents are presented in Table 1: Examination of Completeness of Bid Documents, and attached as Appendix 3. 2.3 Propriety of Signature and Power of Attorney All documents were signed in accordance with the Instructions to Bidders and corrections were also initialed by the authorized person. The power of attorney for signatory of Bidder no. 3 has been issued to bid in XXX. BEC requested the bidder for clarification on this as per provisions of ITB 24.2 of bid documents considering it is a non-material omission. Accordingly the bidder submitted power of attorney giving authority for the signatory to bid for this project. BEC accepted the power of attorney for the signatory. The power of attorney for the signatory of all other bidders was acceptable. The information is included in Table 1, Appendix 3. 3. Determination of Substantial Responsiveness of Bids 3.1 Eligibility of Bidders, Plant and Services In Clauses 4 and 5 of the Instructions to Bidders of the bidding documents it was specified that the bidder, and the plant and the services to be supplied shall be from an eligible source country of ADB. All bidders submitted certifications and necessary documentation which indicated that they are nationals of an eligible member country of ADB. Further, all bidders submitted certification that they were not involved in the consulting services associated with this contract (See Appendix 5, Table 3 of Substantial Responsiveness of Bids to Commercial Terms). 3.2 Bidders’ Qualifications The bidding documents required, in Clause 15 of the Instructions to Bidders, that each bidder submit with the bid evidence of its Technical capability, financial capacity and previous experience in similar works by completing the forms and schedules provided in the bidding document. All bidders submitted required forms and schedules satisfactorily. The detailed review of the information to determine whether the bidder was qualified to perform the requirements of the contract was carried out in accordance with the provisions of the bidding documents. Requests for additional information and clarifications were required for Bidder Nos. 4, 5, 7, and 9 regarding their qualifications/ experiences. The results of the review are summarized in Table 2: Evaluation of Bidders’ Qualifications, and are attached as Appendix 4. The findings of the review are briefly presented below. FIRST STAGE BID EVALUATION REPORT (a) Bidder No. 1 The financial capacity of the bidder was sound. The lead partner of the JV is a building construction contractor and does not possess similar works experience required in the scope of work. The partner of the JV also does not have similar works experience. Therefore, Bidder No. 1 was not qualified to undertake this contract. (b) Bidder No. 2 The financial capacity of the bidder was sound. The lead partner is an irrigation and flood drainage contractor. The lead partner has carried out one project of storm water pumping project at a value of $26.79m which has similar scope. The partner of the JV has carried out one wastewater treatment plant project of $36.43 million including head work pumping. Clause 2.4.2 of section 3 of the bidding documents requires two numbers of projects of similar nature where the bidder’s participation exceeds $30 million. In case of JV, either partner can meet this requirement but each partner must have one project of similar nature of value at least $20 million. The JV has carried out only one similar project of required value of $30 million. hence the JV does not fulfill the requirement of similar works. Therefore, the Bidder no. 2 was not qualified to undertake this contract. (c) Bidder No. 3 The financial capacity of the bidder was quite strong. The bidder has carried out two similar projects as required in the bidding documents. The bidder’s key activity experience submitted for “working in live sewerage system” has been awarded in 2013. BEC decided that this project cannot be considered as substantially completed project and hence requested for clarification on this as per provisions of ITB 24.2 of bid documents considering these are nonmaterial omissions. The bidder submitted experience certificate for this key activity of a previous project. BEC reviewed the clarifications and accepted as adequate. Therefore, the Bidder no. 3 was considered to have satisfactory experience to undertake this contract. (d) Bidder No. 4 The financial capacity of the bidder was sound. As stated in the “Reorganization Declaration” of the bidder the xxxxxx Machinery Complete Equipment (Group) Co. Ltd. has become a subsidiary of the bidder. The two projects submitted for similar experience have been carried out by xxxxxx Machinery Complete Equipment (Group) Co. Ltd. However, these two projects are water supply projects which do not include similar scope of work. The bidder has submitted key activity experience of some other firms for key activities of;1) designing, construction, installation and commissioning of wastewater pumping stations, 2) design, supply and installation of SCADA systems and 3) no-dig technology for pipe laying. The experience records of these key activities submitted using Form Exp -2(b) have been carried out by 127 128 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION contractors namely; yyyyy Urban Construction Design & Research Institute, yyyyy Electrical Automation Design Institute Co. Ltd, and yyyyy zz Construction Co. Ltd. Clarifications was requested form the bidder by a letter dated 10 January 2014 advising to submit the bidder’s relationship with the different firms who had carried out key activities discussed above. It was also advised the bidder to submit translated scope of work of projects submitted for Similar Works experience and for Key Activity experience. The bidder did not submit the clarifications by the date stipulated in the request letter. Therefore, the Bidder no. 4 was not qualified to undertake this contract. (e) Bidder No. 5 The financial capacity of the bidder was sound. The leader of the JV of the bidder has carried out water supply projects and one wastewater project. The water supply project does not have similar scope. The bidder has indicated in the Form Exp 2(a) of the wastewater project that the value of wastewater project as $21.98 million whereas the translated certification shows the value of the project as $10.8 million. Hence BEC considered that the bidder does not qualify for the similar project experience. BEC requested for clarification on the correctness of the value of the project. It was also not clear whether the scope of the work of this project included design and construction of wastewater pumping stations. In addition, the JV does not have experience of the key activity of “training in Operation and Maintenance of wastewater pumping station including developing training manuals and conducting training courses”. BEC also requested clarifications from the bidder on the 1) value of the wastewater project of the lead partner, 2) scope of work of the wastewater project and 3) experience on training in operations & maintenance including developing training manuals and conducting training courses for operations & maintenance staff. The bidder submitted the clarifications. With respect to the value of the wastewater project, the bidder stated that the contract value given in the Form Exp 2(a) is correct as the value given in the translated certificate is given in two different currencies ($10.8 million plus FC810,000,000.00) and is approximately 21.8 million after converting FC to United States dollar. The conversion rate is provided by the bidder with the clarification. BEC accepted the clarification on the value of the wastewater project. With respect to the scope of the wastewater project, the bidder stated that the scope included the design, construction of wastewater pumping stations. With respect to the experience on training in operations & maintenance including developing training manuals and conducting training courses for operations & maintenance staff, the bidder submitted a project carried out by the partner of JV with documentary evidence (copy of the BOQ of the particular project carried out by the partner of the JV). BEC accepted the clarifications submitted by the bidder as adequate. FIRST STAGE BID EVALUATION REPORT The partner of the JV has carried out two similar projects. Therefore the Bidder no. 5 was also considered to have satisfactory experience to undertake this contract. (f) Bidder No. 6 The financial capacity of the bidder was adequate. Bidder has carried out one water supply project of required value. The scope of water supply project is not similar. The other four projects submitted for wastewater are small in value as against the value of the project specified in the bidding documents. The bidder also does not have experience in key activities in working in live sewerage systems, design, supply and installation of standalone and central SCADA systems and training in operations & maintenance of wastewater pumping stations. Hence the bidder does not comply with the requirements of Clause 2.4 of Section 3 of the bidding documents. Therefore, the Bidder no. 6 was not qualified to undertake this contract. (g) Bidder No. 7 The financial capacity of the bidder was quite strong. Bidder has submitted five projects for similar works. The two similar projects which considered for evaluation do not clearly indicate whether the design and construction of wastewater pumping stations. The bidder has proposed subcontractors for working in live sewerage systems, design, supply and installation of SCADA systems, and design and construction of force mains through subcontracting agreements. The translation of subcontractor’s experience in working in live sewerage system has not been certified. Also the experience of proposed subcontractor for the SCADA system was unclear whether the subcontractor has experience as required in the scope of work under this contract. BEC requested for clarification on this as per provisions of ITB 24.2 of bid documents considering these are nonmaterial omissions. Accordingly, the bidder submitted clarifications on the similar works and with the translations of the completion certificates of subcontractors. BEC reviewed the clarifications and accepted as adequate. Clarification was also requested on whether the key activity experience for carrying out micro tunneling work of 2km length has been fulfilled in one contract or not. The bidder submitted two projects carried out by the proposed subcontractor of the bidder satisfying this requirement further. BEC accepted the clarifications submitted by the bidder as adequate. Therefore, Bidder no. 7 was considered to have satisfactory experience to undertake this contract. (h) Bidder No. 8 The financial capacity of the bidder was strong. The bidder has submitted audited financial statements for last 5 years and FIN -1 for 3 years. Clarification was requested on this. Accordingly the bidder submitted FIN – 1 for 5 years. Bidder has submitted two projects for similar works experience. The SCADA experience submitted by the bidder was not within last 5 years as against the requirement. Clarification was also requested on this as per provisions of ITB 129 130 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION 24.2 of bid documents considering this is nonmaterial omission. Accordingly the bidder submitted clarification stating that the scope of the first similar experience project included SCADA and provided Bill of Quantities of said project as documentary evidence. BEC accepted this experience as adequate. Therefore, Bidder no. 8 was considered to have satisfactory experience to undertake this contract. (i) Bidder No. 9 The financial capacity of the bidder was sound. The bidder has submitted two projects for similar project criteria. One of the similar projects has been carried out by the xxxxx in Country A. The XXXX Group has been re-formed by reunification of xxxxx City C and xxxxx City V. Hence the BEC accepted the bidder’s claim on the experience of this similar project. The scope of the project submitted as the proof for key activity experience of working in live sewerage system was not clear. Also the documentary proof submitted for SCADA works was unsigned. Clarifications were requested from the bidder on these two issues. Accordingly, the bidder submitted clarifications with documentary evidence. BEC accepted this experience as adequate. Therefore, Bidder No. 9 was considered to have satisfactory experience to undertake this contract. 3.3 Compliance with Commercial Terms and Conditions 3.3.1 Terms of Payment and Reservations to Commercial Conditions All bidders accepted the terms and conditions of the bidding documents with respect to payments and also accepted the price adjustment provisions and specified mechanism for the determination of price adjustments. None of the proposals contained serious reservations to the major commercial conditions of the bidding documents. All bidders accepted the provisions for liquidated damages, functional guarantees and the corresponding adjustments, performance security, insurance and other stipulations for the transportation of goods, warranty conditions, and after sales service. 3.3.2 Time for Completion/Contract Execution Schedule The contract execution schedules and sequence of delivery of major units of plant were evaluated in detail and compared with the requirements of the bidding documents. The contract execution schedules submitted by the bidders were generally in order. All the bidders’ proposed contract execution schedules that met the completion requirement of 36 months for the total scope of work. The results of the review were summarized in Table 3: Substantive Responsiveness of Bids and are attached as Appendix 5. FIRST STAGE BID EVALUATION REPORT 4. Detailed Evaluation for Technical Requirements 4.1 Nonresponsive Bids and Responsive Bids As discussed in Section 3, in particular subsection 3.2, Bidders’ Qualifications, out of the nine bidders who submitted bids, the bids of five bidders were determined as substantially responsive to the requirements of the bidding documents. The other four bidders were determined as nonresponsive as they did not have the minimum experience requirements stipulated in the bidding documents. Their bids were rejected and thus excluded from further evaluation. The list of responsive and nonresponsive bidders is as follows: A. Responsive Bidders 1) Bidder No. 3 2) Bidder No. 5 3) Bidder No. 7 4) Bidder No. 8 5) Bidder No. 9 B. Nonresponsive Bidders 1) Bidder No. 1 2) Bidder No. 2 3) Bidder No. 4 4) Bidder No. 6 4.2 Evaluation of Technical Requirements of Responsive Bids The scope of work, Technical information, and data submitted by the bidders were scrutinized in detail and comparisons were carried out with the Technical requirements of the bidding documents. All five bidders submitted substantially complete information and generally satisfied the Technical requirements of the bidding documents. Because of the nature of the rehabilitation works and the size of the plant and equipment involved, many clarifications and additional information were required to assess the Technical acceptability and standards of the goods, equipment and services offered, and also to assess the completeness of the scope of renovation works. The results of the scrutiny are summarized in Table 4: Salient Technical Features of Bids (Technical proposals) and attached as Appendix 6. The minor adjustments required in the bidder’s Technical proposals were as follows: 4.2.1. Bidder No. 3 (a) CVs of Experts/Personnel Proposed key experts/personnel are acceptable. Alternative personnel proposed were not considered for evaluation. Previous experience of proposed Civil/ Structural Engineer is not detailed enough and the CV of the person who will 131 132 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION be in-charge of commissioning has not been submitted. Proposed organization chart of the bidder for the different stages in the contract was not given. Hence, CVs of Civil/Structural Engineer and person in-charge of commissioning with detailed previous experiences are required. Organization chart showing different stages of the project implementation with names of the persons are required. (b) Exceptions and deviations The bidder has proposed impeller free passage as 75-100mm whereas the bid requires 100mm free passage. As it was understood that 100mm free passage reduces the pump efficiency Addendum no. 3 was issued and the bidder has to fulfill the requirement given in the addendum. Bidder has proposed new performance testing standards. The bid specifies the previous version. Bidder needs to confirm that whether he agrees for the standards specified in the bid. (c) Layouts Bidder has submitted layout plans to demonstrate concept for pumping stations identified for complete new construction. Bidder needs to understand that it requires optimizing the operations & maintenance friendliness in pumping stations and hence needs to confirm that he understands this. No changes are done to the concept drawings of pumping stations identified for rehabilitation. Bidder has to provide changes if any for these pumping stations as well for evaluation. In both cases; pumping stations identified for complete new construction and pumping stations identified for rehabilitation bidder has to provide details by consider revised flows given in Addendum no. 3. (d) Local Agent and Capability for Repair Bidder has proposed a local agent but this cannot be accepted for all equipment. In the absence of an accredited agent appointed by the manufacturer, the bidder’s proposed agent can be accepted. In the Second-Stage Bid submission bidder has to comply with the requirements given in Addendum no. 3. (e) Subcontractors Bidder has not stated whether he intends to subcontract parts of civil construction and mechanical installations. If bidder wishes to engage subcontractors, the details of subcontractors are required to provide for evaluation. (f) Design Subcontractors Bidder has indicated that all designs to be carried out in-house. However this needs to be confirmed by the bidder. FIRST STAGE BID EVALUATION REPORT The bidder has shown 756 days for designs. The bidder has to ensure that with 756 days of design period that he can complete the work as per the scheduled time period of the bid. The SCADA system design proposed is a reproduction of what is given in the bidding document. Bidder needs to submit his assessment on what is given in the bidding document or his own proposal for reviewing and acceptance. (g) Operations of Pumping Stations during Construction The work will be carried out in live pumping stations and the bidder has to operate the pumping stations during the construction stage while meeting the national environmental regulations. Bidder needs to confirm that his proposed diversion arrangement can meet this requirement. (h) Precommissioning, Commissioning, and Functional Guarantee Tests Bidder has not submitted commissioning testing plan and the functional guarantee testing plan for evaluation. Addendum no. 3 has been issued for precommissioning, commissioning and functional guarantee test plans. The bidder has to submit test plans accordingly. (i) Civil Works Bidder has not provided demolition plan and debris removal for pumping stations. Proposed layout plans of pumping stations have been provided. Bidder has to confirm that proposed layout plans assures the operational issues, health and safety of workers and hydraulic requirements. Septage disposal at xxxxxxx pumping station has not been identified in the bidder’s proposal. Bidder has to provide this. The structural investigations that the bidder intends to carryout to assess the structural stability of pumping stations to be rehabilitated are not provided. In the bidder’s proposal the flood frequency against which the pumping stations are planned to be designed is not given. The bidder has been provided the layout of the proposed force mains. Based on this, the bidder has to determine the locations of valves and accordingly what environmental safeguards against odour and pollution are considered. The method of construction proposed needs confirmation from the bidder that he understands construction issues. (j) Construction and Construction Management Proposed organization structure indicates that civil works to be managed by electrical/mechanical engineers. The scope of work involves large scale civil works. Hence the proposed management arrangement is not acceptable and there need to be a senior manager for civil works. Bidder needs to confirm this. Construction schedule does not show the laying of pumping mains. In the proposed organization structure, QA/QC organization arrangement is not clear enough. 133 134 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION Details of flow diversion and operation of pumping stations during the construction stage are not detailed enough. Bidder has not shown that he understood the work involved with the overflow arrangement. A confirmation is required from the bidder he has the understanding on the issue. Bidder needs to operate the pumping station during construction. However the bidder has not stated how he plans to do this. With respect to the pumping stations identified for rehabilitation, the bidder needs to investigate and strengthen existing sumps where necessary. Bidder has to confirm that he will carry out this. (k) Method Statement The method statements for mechanical is submitted and adequately addressed. (l) Grit Removal system The layouts proposed show screened wastewater turns 900 bend to the grit removal system. This is not appropriate as silt tends to deposit. The clarification submitted by the bidder is not adequate enough to justify siltation can be prevented. Hence the bidder needs to confirm this at detail design stage and if it founds as inappropriate to provide a suitable arrangement. The guaranteed grit removal rate of the proposed mechanism to be confirmed for the pumping stations identified for rehabilitation. The proposed manufacturer for grit pump is a grit process equipment manufacturer. Bidder has to submit a grit pump manufacturer for evaluation. The type of grit pump proposed for existing pumping stations is not clear. Bidder has to clearly state this. The site layouts of the bidder show that the proposed grit removal mechanism as vortex type. Bidder needs to confirm at the Second-Stage Bid that the hydraulic solution of the grit removal system shall satisfy the flows in 2015 and 2030 as per the revised flows provided in Addendum no. 3. (m) Coarse Screens, Screw Conveyor, and Compactor Bidder has not submitted process solution for screen removal. Bidder needs to confirm manufacturer(s) for screens, screw conveyor and screened compactor in the second stage bid. Bidder needs to confirm at the second stage bid that the hydraulic solution of the coarse screen shall satisfy the flows in 2015 and 2030 as per the revised flows provided in Addendum no. 3. (n) Pumps, Booster Pumps, and Sump pumps Bidder has not demonstrated the pump selection criteria. Pump capacities proposed by the bidder shall satisfy the flows in 2015 and 2030 as given in Addendum no. 3. FIRST STAGE BID EVALUATION REPORT (o) Piping within Pumping Station Bidder has not given the details of the proposed pipe manufacturer. Hence the bidder has to provide details for evaluation. (p) Penstocks, Gate Valves, Check Valves, and Cranes The bidder shall confirm his manufacturer(s) for penstocks, gate valves, check valves and cranes. (q) Ventilation System, Extract Fans, and Filters The bidder shall confirm his manufacturer(s) for activated carbon filter. (r) Electrical Bidder has proposed acceptable brands for all electrical equipment except for actuators. Past experience of diesel generator manufacturer has not been provided. Hence the bidder has to provide the details of manufacturer and local agent of actuators and the past experience of manufacturer of diesel generator for review and acceptance. (s) Instrumentation and SCADA system Bidder proposes number of manufacturer’s for field measuring equipment. The bidder needs to confirm the manufacturer at the Second-Stage Bid. The proposed local support for field measuring equipment is not acceptable as per the requirements in the bid. The details of the developer of the software and the agreement with the local agent for the central SCADA system have not been submitted. Bidder needs to provide this for evaluation purposes. Bidder proposed the manufacturer and local agent for ICA panels. However bidder has failed to provide details of responsibilities of design and production of drawings, fabrication and factory testing of panels, initial and site programming of ICA panel and SCADA system and after sales support. Bidder needs to provide them at Second-Stage Bid. Bidder’s proposal of “Integration of the SCADA system of the existing three pumping stations” is a reproduction of what is given in the bidding document. Bidder needs to submit his assessment on what is given in the bidding document or his own proposal for reviewing and acceptance. 135 136 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION 4.2.2 Bidder No. 5 (a) CVs of Experts/Personnel The CVs of proposed key experts/personnel, Civil/Structural Engineer and person in charge of commissioning show that the team capacity is not adequate. Bidder has to provide full descriptive CVs with relevant experience for review. Bidder also needs to submit commissioning and testing organization chart with the Second-Stage Bid. (b) Exceptions and Deviations No exceptions or deviations to the bidding documents given in the submission. However it was noted in the bid, the bidder has stated less removal efficiency. Bidder needs to refer Addendum no. 3 and confirm the removal efficiency with the Second-Stage Bid. (c) Layouts Bidder has submitted layout drawings showing process equipment. Bidder needs to submit site layout drawings to demonstrate actual size of proposed structures. The layout submitted for fort pumping station is not practicable as the available land is not adequate. (d) Local Agent and Capability for Repair Bidder has proposed local agents only for PLC and SCADA system. Bidder needs to propose local agent(s) for all other imported equipment as specified in the bidding documents and Addendum no. 3. (e) Spares The list of spare parts has not been provided. The bidder has to submit the list of spare parts for 5 years operation based on manufacturer’s recommendation. Additionally the bidder has to propose spare parts which are not readily available with the local agent for employer to determine to procure in price schedules 1 and 2 provided in the bid. (f) Subcontractors Bidder has not stated whether he intends to sub-contract parts of mechanical installations. If bidder wishes to engage subcontractors, the details of subcontractors are required to be provided for evaluation. If the bidder intends to carry out no-dig pipe laying by himself, bidder has to provide proof of previous work. (g) Design Subcontractors Bidder has not provided the details of how he is going to do the designs. If this to be subcontracted the bidder needs to provide the details of subcontractor for evaluation and their willingness. FIRST STAGE BID EVALUATION REPORT (h) Operations of Pumping Stations during Construction The work will be carried out live pumping stations and the bidder has to operate the pumping stations during the construction stage while meeting the national environmental regulations. Bidder needs to confirm that his proposed diversion arrangement can meet this requirement. (i) Precommissioning, Commissioning, and Functional Guarantee Tests Bidder has not submitted commissioning testing plan and the functional guarantee testing plan for evaluation. Addendum no. 3 has been issued for precommissioning, commissioning and functional guarantee test plans. The bidder has to submit test plans accordingly. (j) Civil Works Bidder has not provided demolition plan and removal of debris from pumping stations. Proposed layout plans of pumping stations have not been provided. Bidder has reproduced the layout plans given in the bidding documents without any value addition. The bidder has to ensure operational issues and hydraulic requirements have been taken into account when submitting his proposed layout plans. Septage disposal at xxxxxxx pumping station has not been identified. The structural investigations that the bidder intends to carryout to assess the structural stability of pumping stations to be rehabilitated are not provided. Details of proposed force mains such as locations of valves, addressing environmental issues and construction issues are not given. (k) Construction and Construction Management Construction method statement submitted does not include the details of bypass arrangement during construction, compliance with environmental safeguard requirements, quality control and health and safety aspects. The mobilization schedule does not cover the equipment and human resource mobilization required for the entire contract period. In the proposed organization structure, specialist required for underground work is not identified and QA/ QC organization arrangement is not clear enough. The EMP submitted is not specific to this project and a general approach. Details of flow diversion and operation of pumping stations during the construction stage are not provided. Bidder has reproduced the section in the bidding documents on structural improvement of pumping stations identified for rehabilitation without any value addition. Bidder needs to confirm whether this solution is acceptable or needs any modification at the Second-Stage Bidding and provide details discussed on the above paragraph. (l) Method Statement The method statement for mechanical, electrical and instrumentation are too generic and bidder needs to provide them in detail. 137 138 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION (m) Grit Removal system The drawings of proposed grit removal system have not been provided. Bidder needs to provide this to assess the geometry and arrangement. Proposed manufacturer of grit pump is not given. Bidder has proposed vacuum pump as the grit pump and it is not acceptable. The proposed grit removal mechanism for the pumping stations identified for rehabilitation is not clear. Bidder needs to submit the mechanism clearly for evaluation. Bidder needs to confirm at the Second-Stage Bid that the hydraulic solution of the grit removal system shall satisfy the flows in 2015 and 2030 as per the revised flows provided in Addendum no. 3. (n) Coarse Screens, Screw Conveyor and Compactor Bidder has not submitted process solution for screen removal. Bidder has proposed number of manufacturers for coarse screens, screw conveyor and compactor. Bidder needs to be firm about manufacturers for each at the Second-Stage Bid. Bidder needs to confirm at the Second-Stage Bid that the hydraulic solution of the grit removal system shall satisfy the flows in 2015 and 2030 as per the revised flows provided in Addendum no. 3. (o) Pumps, Booster Pumps and Sump pumps Bidder has proposed number of manufacturers for main pumps, booster pumps and sump pumps. Bidder needs to be firm about manufacturers for each at SecondStage Bid. There are discrepancies in the flows in Technical schedules submitted by the bidder and needs to be clarified. The bidder has not demonstrated the pump selection criteria to meet design flow conditions in 2015 and 2030. Pump capacities proposed by the bidder shall satisfy the flows in 2015 and 2030 as given in Addendum no. 3. (p) Piping within Pumping Station Bidder needs to comply with the specifications of pipe material. This needs to be confirmed with the Second-Stage Bid. (q) Penstocks, Gate Valves, Check Valves, and Cranes The information provided about the penstock manufacturer is not adequate to evaluate. Bidder shall be firm about his manufacturer(s) for gate valves, check valves and cranes. (r) Ventilation System, Extract Fans, and Filters Proposed manufacturer for the ventilation system does not comply with specifications. The bidder shall confirm his manufacturer for activated carbon filter. The proposed activated carbon filter does not meet the requirement of removal of H2S and organic sulphur compounds. The bidder has to provide these details to evaluate the acceptability. FIRST STAGE BID EVALUATION REPORT (s) Electrical Bidder has proposed number of manufacturers for electrical panels, diesel generator and motors. Bidder needs to be firm about manufacturer of each and submit accordingly for evaluation at the Second-Stage Bid. (t) Instrumentation and SCADA system Bidder has to submit the copy of agreement with local agent for support of the software and programming of the proposed SCADA system. Clarification given by the bidder regarding the proposed manufacturer of ICA panels is vague and not acceptable. Bidder has failed to provide details of responsibilities of design and production of drawings, fabrication and factory testing of panels, initial and site programming of ICA panel and SCADA system and after sales support. Bidder has not submitted an acceptable mechanism for integration of the SCADA system of the existing three pumping stations based on the details given in the bidding document. Bidder needs to submit his assessment with the Second-Stage Bid based on the information provided at this stage. 4.2.3 Bidder No.7 (a) CVs of Experts/Personnel The details given in CVs of proposed key experts/personnel are inadequate. Bidder requires providing relevant experience, size, capacity, project value of previous projects for evaluation. The CV of the person who will be in-charge of commissioning has not been submitted. The team responsible for structural strengthening of pumping stations identified for rehabilitation is not detailed enough. Hence, CVs with detailed previous experiences is required to be submitted at the Second-Stage Bid. (b) Exceptions and Deviations Grit removal efficiency does not comply with the specification. A clear explanation is required to be submitted about this deviation for review. Bidder proposed to use existing grit chambers of the pumping stations identified for rehabilitation for grit removing. Grit is a serious issue and hence this would not be feasible due to the capacity issue. The clarification submitted by the bidder is not acceptable as it does not promote separation of grit particles. The bidder needs to submit a proper solution with the Second-Stage Bid. (c) Layouts Bidder has submitted layout plans to demonstrate concept for all the pumping stations. For some of the pumping stations the bidder has proposed two separate sumps. Bidder has to provide reasons for this suggestion for evaluation and also confirm his proposal for grit removal based on the revised flows given in Addendum no. 3. 139 140 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION (d) Local Agent and Capability for Repair Bidder has provided a list of the local agents but has to provide the documentary evidence to confirm the capability of the local agent. The requirement of the local agent for mechanical items were amended through the Addendum no. 3 issued to the bidders and the bidder has to provide the details of local agent and its capacities accordingly. (e) Spares Bidder has provided a list of spare parts. Bidder will have to confirm the requirements given in the bid documents by submitting the list of spare parts for 5 years operation based on manufacturer’s recommendation. Additionally the bidder has to propose spare parts which were not readily available with the local agent for employer to determine to procure in price schedules 1 and 2 provided in the bid. (f) Subcontractors Bidder has provided the details of proposed subcontractors for parts of civil construction and mechanical installations. (g) Design Subcontractors Bidder has not provided the details of how he is going to do the designs. If this to be subcontracted the bidder needs to provide the details of subcontractor and their willingness. (h) Operations of Pumping Stations during Construction The work will be carried out live pumping stations and the bidder has to operate the pumping stations during the construction stage while meeting the environmental regulations. Bidder needs to confirm that his proposed diversion arrangement can meet this requirement. (i) Precommissioning, Commissioning and Functional Guarantee Tests Bidder has submitted precommissioning, commissioning testing plan and the functional guarantee testing plan for evaluation. Addendum no. 3 has been issued for precommissioning, commissioning, and functional guarantee test plans. The bidder has to submit test plans accordingly. (j) Civil Works Bidder has not provided demolition plan and debris removal for pumping stations. Proposed layout plans of pumping stations have been provided. Bidder has to confirm that proposed layout plans assures the operational issues and hydraulic requirements. Septage disposal at xxxxxx pumping station has been provided. The bidder has to confirm that separate screening and grit removal system will be provided for septage management. The structural investigations FIRST STAGE BID EVALUATION REPORT that the bidder intends to carryout to assess the structural stability of pumping stations identified for rehabilitation are not provided. Details of proposed force mains such as locations of valves are given and the bidder has to confirm the adequacy of them. Addressing environmental safeguards against odor of the force mains has to be provided. (k) Construction and Construction Management Bidder’s work plan, construction schedule, and the organization chart are acceptable. The mobilization schedule has to be revised to include the equipment required for entire contract period. Details of flow diversion and operation of pumping stations during the construction stage are detailed adequately. Bidder’s proposal does not confirm that the bidder is ready to investigate and strengthen the existing structures of pumping station identified for rehabilitation. Hence structural strengthening of sumps of pumping stations identified for rehabilitation is not adequately addressed. (l) Method Statement The method statements are provided and adequately detailed. (m) Grit Removal System The proposed grit removal system of some of the pumping stations has not taken into account how to optimize the present mechanism. The bidder needs to provide this. Grit containers and classifiers have been proposed in pretreatment area close to the screening containers. However this has not shown in the proposed pumping station layouts. The guaranteed grit removal rate of the proposed mechanism needs to be confirmed. Bidder has proposed manufacturers for grit pump and grit classifier but needs to be firm about the proposed manufacturers. Bidder has not confirmed that the proposed grit removal systems of some of the pumping stations are capable to meet the requirements in 2015 and 2030 as required in the bidding documents. Bidder needs to confirm at the Second-Stage Bid that the hydraulic solution of the grit removal system shall satisfy the flows in 2015 and 2030 as per the revised flows provided in Addendum no. 3. (n) Coarse Screens, Screw Conveyor, and Compactor Bidder has submitted manufacturers and process solution for screening and screen removal. However the bidder needs to be firm about his manufacturers for screens, screw conveyor and screened compactor. Bidder needs to confirm at the Second-Stage Bid that the hydraulic solution of the grit removal system shall satisfy the flows in 2015 and 2030 as per the revised flows provided in Addendum no. 3. 141 142 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION (o) Pumps, Booster Pumps, and Sump pumps Bidder has demonstrated the pump selection criteria. The pump curves required to match for 2015 and 2030 flows. Bidder needs to provide manufacturer details of sump pump and be firm about the manufacturers of main pumps and booster pumps. Pump capacities proposed by the bidder shall satisfy the flows in 2015 and 2030 as given in Addendum no. 3. (p) Piping within Pumping Station The details of the proposed pipe manufacturer of the bidder are not adequately given. (q) Penstocks, Gate Valves, Check Valves, and Cranes The bidder shall be firm about his manufacturer for penstocks, gate valves, check valves and cranes. The manufacturer’s authorization provided does not comply with the list make selected under “Make and Country of Manufacturer.” Bidder needs to clarify this. (r) Ventilation System, Extract Fans, and Filters Extract air duct ventilation system proposed by the bidder doses not comply with the specifications. Hence the bidder needs to confirm to the specifications. The proposed activated carbon filter does not meet the requirement of removal of H2S and organic sulphur compounds. The bidder has to provide these details to evaluate the acceptability. (s) Electrical Bidder has to be firm about the manufacturer of the diesel generator and the capacities or capacity calculations of generators are required to be provided. (t) Instrumentation and SCADA system Bidder proposed the manufacturer and local agent for ICA panels. However bidder has failed to provide details of responsibilities of design and production of drawings, fabrication and factory testing of panels, initial and site programming of ICA panel and SCADA system and after sales support. Proposal of how integrating the SCADA system of the existing three pumping stations is submitted but needs to be elaborated. 4.2.4 Bidder No.8 (a) CVs of Experts/Personnel The CVs of proposed key experts/personnel are incomplete as those are not descriptive with relevant experience, size and capacity of pumping stations handled. The rehabilitation of pumping stations requires strengthening of existing sumps of pumping stations. The CV of the person who will be in-charge FIRST STAGE BID EVALUATION REPORT of commissioning has not been submitted. Hence CVs with detailed previous experiences is required with the Second-Stage Bid. (b) Exceptions and Deviations Bidder has not deviated from the reference standards and from reference specifications. Bidder proposed to use existing grit chambers of the pumping stations identified for rehabilitation for grit removing. Grit is a serious issue and hence this would not be feasible due to the capacity issue. The proposal submitted by the bidder is not acceptable. The bidder needs to submit a proper solution with the Second-Stage Bid. (c) Layouts Bidder has submitted same layout plans given in the bidding documents. The bidder needs to propose his own layouts based on his proposal while confirming the operator and maintenance friendliness. (d) Local Agent and Capability for Repair Bidder has proposed a local agent but this cannot be accepted for all equipment. In the absence of an accredited agent appointed by the manufacturer, the bidder’s proposed agent can be considered provided that bidder submits proofs to confirm the local agent is fully capable of providing after sales service as per the requirements of the bidding documents. In the Second-Stage Bid submission bidder has to comply with the requirements given in the Addendum no. 3. (e) Spares The list of spare parts has not been provided. The bidder has to submit the list of spare parts for 5 years operation based on the manufacturer’s recommendation. (f) Subcontractors Bidder has provided a list of subcontractors. No documentary evidence of statement of engagement or willingness of proposed subcontractors to work in the project. Bidder needs to provide this information with the Second-Stage Bid. (g) Design Subcontractors Bidder has not provided the details of how he is going to do the designs. If this to be subcontracted the bidder needs to provide the details of subcontractor and their willingness. Design criteria for civil, mechanical, electrical and instrumentation are not comprehensive enough. Proposed surge analysis system is not acceptable. The SCADA system design proposed is generally acceptable. 143 144 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION (h) Operations of Pumping Stations during Construction The work will be carried out live in pumping stations and the bidder has to operate the pumping stations during the construction stage while meeting the environmental regulations. Bidder needs to confirm that his proposed diversion arrangement can meet this requirement. (i) Precommissioning, Commissioning, and Functional Guarantee Tests Bidder has not submitted detail plans of above. Addendum no. 3 has been issued for precommissioning, commissioning, and functional guarantee test plans. The bidder has to submit test plans accordingly. (j) Civil Works Bidder has provided demolition plan, proposed layout plans of pumping stations. However the bidder has to provide internal layout and architecture of the pumping stations with due consideration of operation of pumping stations, health and safety aspect etc. The structural investigations that the bidder intends to carryout to assess the structural stability of pumping stations identified for rehabilitation are not provided. Details of proposed force mains such as locations and sizes of valves, addressing environmental issues and method of construction are not given. Bidder needs to provide these details with the Second-Stage Bid. (k) Construction and Construction Management Method statement submitted by the bidder is not detailed enough and do not address how the bidder is going to tackle the sub surface conditions such as high ground water, adverse geological conditions etc at pumping station sites. The method of constructing pumping mains is not described. The mobilization schedule submitted has to be detailed to show the resource requirement for the entire construction period. The QA/QC plan, EMP and Health and Safety plan shall be specific to the work under this contract. Bidder’s proposal for overflows seems that the bidder has no understanding of providing overflows for pumping stations identified for new construction. Bidder requires reviewing the scope given and submitting his proposal with the Second-Stage Bid. Bidder has not submitted the operational plan of the pumping stations during construction and how the existing structures of pumping stations identified for rehabilitation will be strengthen. Bidder needs to submit these details with the Second-Stage Bid. (l) Method Statement The method statement for mechanical, electrical and instrumentation is not detailed enough. Bidder has to submit the detailed method statement at the Second-Stage Bid. FIRST STAGE BID EVALUATION REPORT (m) Grit Removal system Bidder proposes to use existing grit traps of pumping stations identified for rehabilitation. Due to insufficient capacity of the grit traps this solution will not be satisfactory. The bidder needs to submit satisfactory solution for this. The capacities of grit removal systems for each pumping station for 2015 and 2030 flows have not been evaluated by the bidder. Bidder needs to confirm at the Second-Stage Bid that the hydraulic solution of the grit removal system shall satisfy the flows in 2015 and 2030 as per the revised flows provided in Addendum no. 3. (n) Coarse Screens, Screw Conveyor, and Compactor Bidder has submitted manufacturers for coarse screens, screw conveyor and compactor. Bidder needs to confirm at the Second-Stage Bid that the hydraulic solution of the screen removal system shall satisfy the flows in 2015 and 2030 as per the revised flows provided in Addendum no. 3. (o) Pumps, Booster Pumps, and Sump pumps Bidder has not demonstrated the pump selection criteria adequately. Proposed manufacturer for booster pump is not acceptable with the requirements in the bidding document. Pump capacities proposed by the bidder shall satisfy the flows in 2015 and 2030 as given in Addendum no. 3. (p) Piping within Pumping Station The bidder has to provide the proposed pipe system and manufacturer of the pipes. Bidder needs to provide these details with the Second-Stage Bid. (q) Penstocks, Gate Valves, Check Valves, and Cranes The bidder has not proposed manufacturers and process solutions for gate valves and check valves. Proposed manufacturer for the crane is not acceptable as it does not fulfill the specifications. Bidder needs to provide these details with the Second-Stage Bid. (r) Ventilation System, Extract Fans, and Filters The bidder has not provided the process solutions of the ventilation system. The proposed activated carbon filter does not meet the requirement of removal of H2S and organic sulphur compounds. The bidder has to provide these details with the Second-Stage Bid. 145 146 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION (s) Electrical Bidder has indicated that capacity requirement of the diesel generator. However the bidder has to submit capacity calculation based on the manufacturer’s software which will be chosen by the bidder as per the specifications. To comply with the environmental requirements the noise level reduction of the generator to the acceptable level is required. This cannot be achieved with open type generators. Bidder shall provide confirmation on these requirements with the Second-Stage Bid. (t) Instrumentation and SCADA system Bidder has proposed local agent for ICA panels. However no records of past experience submitted as required in the b id and hence not acceptable. Bidder has failed to provide details of responsibilities of design and production of drawings, fabrication and factory testing of panels, initial and site programming of ICA panel and SCADA system and after sales support. Integration of the SCADA system of the existing three pumping stations is provided. But more information is required. Bidder needs to provide these information with the Second-Stage Bid. 4.2.5 Bidder No.9 (a) CVs of Experts/Personnel The CVs of proposed key experts/personnel are incomplete as those do not contain the details of previous experience. The rehabilitation of pumping stations requires strengthening of existing sumps of pumping stations. The Civil/Structural expert shall have experience on such work. The organization plan detailing with person in charge of commissioning during commissioning period is required to evaluate the bidder’s preparedness. The bidder will have to provide detail CVs to assess the capacity with the Second-Stage Bid. It is observed that some of the experts in the list of experts proposed are different from the CVs submitted. (b) Exceptions and Deviations The bidder has proposed impeller free passage as 50-75mm whereas the bid requires 100mm free passage. As it was understood that 100mm free passage reduces the pump efficiency Addendum no. 3 was issued and the bidder has to fulfill the requirement given in the addendum. Bidder has made exceptions and assumptions in mechanical, electrical, and general requirements. The mechanical and electrical deviations from the specifications are not acceptable and the bidder needs to confirm to the specifications. The assumptions made in terms of general requirements such as local taxes, providing spares and tools for operation during construction are deviations to the bidding documents. The bidder will require confirming to the above requirements in the bidding documents at the Second-Stage Bid. FIRST STAGE BID EVALUATION REPORT The work is to be carried out in fenced boundaries of pumping station premises which have already established with other utilities such as electrical substations. Hence the proposed space requirement for electrical rooms in the drawings is not matching. The bidder has to rearrange the location and space requirements accordingly and submit with Second-Stage Bid. (c) Layouts Bidder has submitted layout plans for new pumping stations. The layouts were not submitted for pumping stations scheduled for rehabilitation. The bidder needs to understand that proposal for grit removal in these pumping stations is required as grit is a serious issue. Bidder needs to submit his proposals by taking into account the geometry of the existing pumping station with the SecondStage Bid for evaluation. (d) Local Agent and Capability for Repair Bidder has not stated the details of proposed local agents for electromechanical and instrumentation equipment. The requirement of the local agent for mechanical items were amended through the Addendum no. 3 issued to the bidders and the bidder has to provide the details of local agent and its capacities. (e) Spares The bidder has to submit the list of spare parts for 5 years operation based on manufacturer’s recommendation. Additionally the bidder has to propose spare parts which are not readily available with the local agent for employer to determine to procure in price schedules 1 and 2 provided in the bid. (f) Subcontractors Bidder stated that it is a EPC company and the civil agency will nominate to execute the civil works. This is not acceptable and the bidder has to propose his subcontractors for evaluation. Bidder intends to subcontract Mechanical installations as well. However the list of subcontractors and the willingness of subcontractors to work with the bidder are not submitted. Under Design Criteria–Technical Schedule-Mechanical, the bidder has proposed two names whereas under subcontractor bidder has proposed several names as subcontractors for supplying equipment. Bidder needs to provide more specifically the choice of subcontractors confirming to the requirements given in the bidding documents at the Second-Stage Bid. (g) Design Subcontractors Bidder has not provided the details of how he is going to do the designs. If this to be subcontracted the bidder needs to provide the details of subcontractor and their willingness at the Second-Stage Bid. 147 148 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION The work program of the bidder indicates short period for investigations and designs. Due consideration has not been given for completion of designs and drawings before the commencement of construction. Bidder has not given how he proposes to improve the structural stability of the pumping stations of the ones identified for rehabilitation. Bidder has neither stated that he is going to adopt the methods suggested in the bidding document nor his own method. The SCADA system design proposed is a reproduction of what is given in the bidding document. Bidder needs to submit his assessment on what is given in the bidding document or his own proposal with the Second-Stage Bid. (h) Operations of Pumping Stations during Construction The work will be carried out in live pumping stations and the bidder has to operate the pumping stations during the construction stage while meeting the environmental regulations. Bidder needs to confirm that his proposed diversion arrangement can meet this requirement. (i) Precommissioning, Commissioning, and Functional Guarantee Tests Bidder has not submitted detail plans of above. Addendum no. 3 has been issued for precommissioning, commissioning, and functional guarantee test plans. The bidder has to submit test plans accordingly. (j) Civil Works Bidder has not provided demolition plan of pumping stations identified for rehabilitation. Bidder has reproduced layout plans given in the bidding document. Bidder is required to review the layout plans by taking into account operational issues, hydraulic requirements, health and safety and accessibility to repair etc. The structural investigations that the bidder intends to carryout to assess the structural stability of pumping stations identified for rehabilitation are not provided. Details of proposed force mains such as locations and sizes of valves, addressing environmental issues and method of construction are not given. Bidder has not considered septage management requirement at xxxxxxx pumping station. Bidder is required to provide these details with the second-stage bid. (k) Construction and Construction Management Method statement submitted by the bidder is not detailed enough and do not address how the bidder is going to tackle the subsurface conditions such as high ground water, adverse geological conditions etc at pumping station sites. The method of constructing pumping mains is not described. The equipment required for such activities are not listed. Bidder has not submitted the method statement for mechanical installations. Flow diversion during construction has been discussed but details are inadequate. The bidder’s understanding on the work involvement of the existing FIRST STAGE BID EVALUATION REPORT overflow arrangement is inadequate. Bidder needs to provide above details with the Second-Stage Bid. (l) Method Statement The method statement for mechanical has not been submitted. Hence the bidder needs to submit this with the Second-Stage Bid. (m) Grit Removal system Proposed grit removal system of the bidder consists of grit chamber, lift pumps, conveying system to disposal trolley and washing facility with a dewatering capacity. The size of the proposed grit chamber does not match with the existing pumping station structures. This appears that operation and maintainability aspects have not been taken into account. Bidder needs e to explain how he is going to accommodate the chamber. Grit removal efficiency does not comply with the specifications. Bidder needs to comply or submit explanations from the manufacturer as to why the requirement can not be achieved. Grit containers and classifiers have been proposed in pretreatment area close to the screening containers. However, this has not shown in the proposed pumping station layouts. Bidder has proposed vacuum primed pump as grit pump. This is not acceptable to the Employer. Wear of internal surface of pump and grit classifier needs to be eliminated by selecting proper material or with lining. Bidder needs to confirm at the Second-Stage Bid that the hydraulic solution of the grit removal system shall satisfy the flows in 2015 and 2030 as per the revised flows provided in Addendum no. 3. (n) Coarse Screens, Screw Conveyor, and Compactor Bidder needs to confirm that he proposes coarse screens, screw conveyor and compactor complying with the design standards given in the Employer’s requirement and all the pumping stations are to be provided with screens, screw conveyor, and compactor from same manufacture. The process solution proposed by the bidder for handling screen material shall be capable of screening, solid separation, screen cleaning, conveying to washing facility, compacting and discharging with no manual handling. Bidder needs to confirm at the Second-Stage Bid that the hydraulic solution of the screen removal system shall satisfy the flows in 2015 and 2030 as per the revised flows provided in Addendum no. 3. (o) Pumps, Booster Pumps, and Sump pumps Bidder has not demonstrated the pump selection criteria. Pump capacities proposed by the bidder for xxxxxx and yyyyyyy are under capacity and incorrect. The bidder has proposed a standard pump as the booster pump for all the pumping stations without studying the requirements of each pumping station separately. This would result over estimation or under estimation 149 150 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION of the requirement and hence required the bidder to reevaluate as per the requirement. The motors proposed by the bidder do not compatible with the pumps. The VFDs manufacturer proposed is not acceptable as it is not popular make in xxxxx resulting no after sales facilities can be guaranteed. Pump capacities proposed by the bidder shall satisfy the flows in 2015 and 2030 as given in Addendum no. 3. (p) Piping within Pumping Station The manufacturer or the country of origin of the piping work has not been provided. In P and ID diagrams, the bidder has not provided schedule showing the details of pipes that he is going to use. The bidder has to provide these details at the Second-Stage Bid. (q) Penstocks, Gate Valves, Check Valves, and Cranes The proposed penstocks do not meet the requirements given in the bidding documents. The bidder needs to submit reference list of penstock installations in similar projects and after sales service details with the Second-Stage Bid. (r) Ventilation System, Extract Fans, and Filters The bidder has not provided the layout of proposed ventilation system. The proposed activated carbon filter does not meet the requirement of removal of H2S and organic sulphur compounds. The bidder has to provide these details at the Second-Stage Bid. Bidder has proposed several manufacturers for LV+MCC panels, diesel generators. The bidder needs to be firm about his offer without proposing several manufactures. Manufacture and local agent for actuators have not been indicated. (s) Instrumentation and SCADA system Bidder has not provided documentary evidence of the agreement with local agent for field measuring equipment and central SCADA equipment and software. The bidder needs to be firm about his manufacturer(s) in the proposal. Bidder proposed the manufacturer and local agent for ICA panels. However, bidder has failed to provide details of responsibilities of design and production of drawings, fabrication and factory testing of panels, initial and site programming of ICA panel and SCADA system and after sales support. Integration of the SCADA system of the existing three pumping stations is a reproduction of what is given in the bidding document. Bidder needs to submit his assessment on what is given in the bidding document or his own proposal for reviewing and accepting. Bidder requires providing the above details at SecondStage Bid FIRST STAGE BID EVALUATION REPORT 4.3 Clarifications and Discussions The findings of the detailed evaluation of the Technical documents submitted by the responsive bidders as summarized in paragraph 4.2.1 to 4.2.5 were sent on 7 February 20xx to the responsive bidders with the request to study and to prepare for clarification meetings. The clarification meetings were held on 4 March 20xx. In the meantime, the bidders were advised to inquire Technical issues identified in their proposals if they require. All five qualified bidders attended the clarification meetings. They were given time to make a presentation on the clarifications requested followed by a discussion. Following the clarification meetings the bidders were advised to submit clarifications in writing. All five qualified bidders submitted their clarifications by 11 March 20xx. 5. C onclusions and Recommendations On the basis of the analysis of the Technical proposals presented in this Report, it is concluded that: (a) B idder No. 1, Bidder No. 2, Bidder No. 4, and Bidder No. 6 did not have the minimum experience requirements stipulated in the bidding documents. Therefore, it was recommended that their bids should be rejected. (b) T he original Technical proposals supplemented by clarifications, additional information, changes and modifications, where necessary, of the following bidders were considered responsive to the requirements of the bidding documents: 1. Bidder No. 3 2. Bidder No. 5 3. Bidder No. 7 4. Bidder No. 8 5. Bidder No. 9 (c) It was recommended that the above five bidders be informed that their Technical proposals, supplemented by additional information submitted during evaluation of the Technical proposals were considered responsive to the bidding documents and to issue the “Changes Required Pursuant to First Stage Evaluation” to submit the final updated Technical proposal with the commercial proposal. 151 152 Appendix 1 Page 1 of 3 Record of Bid Opening Loan No.xxxxxxx Project Title : xxxxx Wastewater Management Project Bid No. xxxxx (ICB) Bid Title :xxxxx Designing, Construction, Installation and Rehabilitation of Wastewater Pumping Stations of xxxxxx 1. The following bids were received by the closing deadline on 22 October 20xx at 02.00 pm and were publicly opened and announced at 02.00 pm on the same date. The following nine (09) bidders submitted “Technical Proposal” as per instructions of the bidding documents. Technical Proposal Bid No. Name of Bidder/ Nationality Original Alternative Copy Signature 1 Bidder No. l/AUS Yes/CD No Yes Signed 2 Bidder No. 2/PRC Yes No Yes/CD Signed 3 Bidder No. 3/IND Yes/CD No Yes Signed 4 Bidder No. 4/PRC Yes/CD No Yes Signed 5 Bidder No. 5/PRC and MAL Yes/CD No Yes Signed 6 Bidder No. 6/SIN Yes/CD No Yes Signed 7 Bidder No. 7/KOR Yes/CD No Yes Signed 8 Bidder No. 8 KOR Yes/CD No Yes Signed 9 Bidder No. 9/IND Yes/CD No Yes Signed EVALUATION AND QUALIFICATION RECORD OF BIDBID DATA OPENING CRITERIA SHEET Page 2 of 3 2. The following bidders’ representatives attended the public opening of bids and a copy of the attendance sheet is attached as an annexure of this record. Bidding Company Bidder No. Name 1. Mr. xxxxxx Project Manager Bidder No. 1 2. Mr. xxxxxx Country Representative Bidder No. 2 3. Mr. xxxxxx Chief Operations Officer Bidder No. 3 4. Mr. xxxxxx Business Manager Bidder No. 4 5. Mr. xxxxxx Deputy General Manager Bidder No. 5 6. Mr. xxxxxx Sales Executive Bidder No. 6 7. Mr. xxxxxx General Manager Bidder No. 7 8 Mr. xxxxxx General Manager Bidder No. 8 9 Mr. xxxxxx Sales Engineer Bidder No. 9 3. Designation Represented Matters transpiring during the opening of bids. The Bid Opening Committee members and the respective representative of the bidders examined the marking of each of the Technical Proposal envelopes and, after opening, initialed on the first page of the bid. The Bidder no. 2 has stated the CD copy of the bid is in duplicate copy of the bid. 4. Following Bid Opening Committee members attended the public opening of bids. Name of Member Ministry/Department Designation Signature Eng. xxxxxxx GCWMP, PMU DPD (Eng.) Signed xxxxxxx GCWMP Project Eng. (Procurement) Signed xxxxxxx MLGPC Assistant Secretary Signed xxxxxxx GCWMP Accountant Signed Date: 22.10.2013 Time: 2.00pm Venue: Account Division, Ministry of XXXXXX, No. xxx, yyyyy, zzzzzz 153 154 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION Page 3 of 3 Attendance Sheet at Opening of Bids Loan No. xxxxxxx Project title: xxxxxx Wastewater Management Project Bid No. xxxxxx (ICB) Bid title: xxxxxx Designing, Construction, Installation and Rehabilitation of Wastewater Pumping Stations Place: Chief Accountant’s Office, Ministry of xxrxxxxx Date: 25 July 20xx; Time: 11 a.m. The following bidders representatives attended the public opening of bids. Representative Bidder No. Bidders Name 1. Bidder No. I Mr. xxxxxx Project Manager Signed 2. Bidder No. 2 Mr. xxxxxx Country Representative Signed 3. Bidder No. 3 Mr. xxxxxx Chief Operations Officer Signed 4. Bidder No. 4 Mr. xxxxxx Business Manager Signed 5. Bidder No. 5 Mr. xxxxxx Deputy General Manager Signed 6. Bidder No. 6 Mr. xxxxxx Sales Executive Signed 7. Bidder No. 7 Mr. xxxxxx General Manager Signed 8. Bidder No. 8 Mr. xxxxxx General Manager Signed 9. Bidder No. 9 Mr. xxxxxx Sales Engineer Signed Designation Signature 155 Appendix 2 Basic Data Sheet 1 Project Title xxxxxx Wastewater Management Project 2 Loan Number xxxxxxx 3 Bid Titlexxxxxx Designing, Construction, Installation and Rehabilitation of Wastewater Pumping Stations 4 Bid Number xxxxxx (ICB) 5 Estimated Value $47.5 million (including taxes) 6 Dale Invitation for Bids Issued 25 July 20xx Method of Procurement Bidding Procedure International Competitive Bidding Two Stage 8 Bid Closing Date and Time 22 October 20xx 9 Bid Opening Date and time 22 October 20xx at 2 p.m. 7 10 Number of Bids Received Nine Bids 11 Bid Validity Expires (Not Applicable) 12 Date for Determining Applicable Exchange Rates (Not Applicable) 156 Appendix 3 Table 1: Examination of Bids for Completeness and Compliance Bidder No. Item Description 1 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 Bid Documents (First-Stage Bid) Y 1.1 One original, 1 copy and 1 copy in CD Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 1.2 Letter of First Stage Bid N Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 1.3 Alternative bids (If any) Y N N N N N N N N 1.4 Evidence of eligibility of Plant and Services Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 1.5 Evidence of eligibility to perform the Contract Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 1.6 Technical Proposal Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 1.7 Evidence of conformity of plant and services offered to Bidding Doc Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 1.8 List of Subcontractors Y Y P2 Y Y Y Y Y 1.9 Completed Technical Schedules Y N1 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 2 Propriety of Signature and Completeness Y Y Y P3 Y Y Y Y Y Power of Attorney Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Letter of First Stage Bids, properly signed or not P4 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 2.1 2.2 2.3 Completeness of Bids Y = Yes P = Partial N = No NA = Not Applicable 1/ names of the countries not given 2/only list of manufactures given 3/ the person authorization letter issued is not given 4/ manufacture’s authorization not given 2 3 Y Partner1– positive Partner2– positive Partner1– No pending litigation Partner2– No pending litigation 1 Partner2– $21 million Partner1– $346.74 million Turnover Minimum average annual construction turnover of $25 million within last 3 years (in a JV each partner must meet 25% of requirement and one partner must meet 40% of requirement) Require. – $1.724million Partner2 – Assets and line of credit $2.9million Partner1– Assets Partner1– Yes and line of credit – $14.5million Partner2– Yes Cash Flow Capacity Must demonstrate Experience as access to, or a contractor, availability of, subcontractor liquid assets’, or management lines of credit, or contractor for at other financial least the last ten resources. (10) years Partner2– 01 project $24.6m 01 project WW treatment value not given 03 other projects in the range of USD5m to 9m And each partner shall have one contract of similar nature of at least $20m Partner1– 02 Partner1– none projects building construction Partner2– 01 project Capacity $230m but the 231L/sec and component on 360L/sec WW is $16m Participation in at Designing, least 2 contracts construction, installation, (in JV either by commissioning one partner or any two partners of WW PS capacities not 01 each) within the last 5 years, less than 800L/ sec similar to the proposed works, where the value of the Bidder’s participation exceeds $30 million. Qualification Criteria Partner1– none Partner2– SCADA 4 PS Partner2– Yes Design, supply and installation of standalone and central SCADA for not less than 5 PS Partner1– none Experience Rehabilitation of WW PS including bypassing and working in live system Partner2– Dai. not given 3km length technology not given Partner1– none Design and construction of force main of at least 400mm dia. 2 km length using no-dig BEChnology Table 2: Evaluation of Bidders’ Qualifications Net Worth Submission of audited balance sheets for the last 5 years and Bidder’s net worth should be positive. Pending Litigation Shall in total not represent more than 50% of the Bidder’s net worth. Bidder No. Appendix 4 Fail1 Remarks continued on next page Partner2– Yes Partner1– none Training in O& M of WW PS, including developing training manuals and conducting training courses 157 PARTNER2 – $337million $8,959 million PARTNER2 – No PARTNER2 – pending litigation positive Positive Positive (only 3 years given) Bidder 3 – No pending litigation Bidder 4 – No pending litigation 3 4 $240 million Turnover PARTNER1 – $714 million Bidder Pending No. Litigation Net Worth 2 PARTNER1 – No PARTNER1 – pending litigation positive Table continued Require. – $53.56million Assets and line of credit – $469 million and $302 million Require. – $3,785.68 million Assets – $8,618million Yes Yes 01 project capacity 1130L/ sec (xxxxx) 01 project of rehabilitation of WW treatment plant including PS (xxxx) PARTNER2 – none Experience PARTNER1 – none 02 projects Less than required Not given $31.49million and capacity (zzzzz $31.84million project not by the bidder) $50.1 million (58MLD capacity SPT plant, xxxx) 2 contracts of similar $43.76million (xxxxxxx) Qualification Criteria Cash Flow Capacity PARTNER1 – PARTNER1 – yes QMEG – 02 nos. PARTNER1 – none Assets and line of ww treatment credit – $2,398 PARTNER2– yes plant projects PARTNER2 – million and $53 which included 01 project with million headwork capacity 2314L/ pumping sec (wwww) Require. – $84.85 $36.43million million (wwww River Sewerage Project) and $30.98million PARTNER2 – (xxxx River Assets and line Sewage Project) of credit – $50 million PARTNER2 – 02 projects Require. – submitted are $42.88million flood control and irrigation. 01 project storm water pumping considered as similar $26.79million 2 projects given without details (not by the bidder) 01 project PLC, SCADA and wireless communication in WS (xxxxx project) 01 project SCADA and instrumentation work for WS and WW in (xxxx project) PARTNER2 – SCADA of 16 PSs and integration to central SCADA (wwwww) PARTNER1 – none 2 projects given without details (not by the bidder) 150mm to 1000mm dia. Sewer 9.5km length using trenchless (xxxxx) PARTNER2 – 450mm dia. HDPE pipe for 2.7km using no-dig technique (wwww) PARTNER1 – none Remarks Fail1 continued on next page 1 project given without details Training in operations & maintenance (xxxx Project) PARTNER2 – 02 projects for 1 year O & M training, training manual and conducting training (Loushan PARTNER1 –none 158 APPENDIX 4 6 (only 3 years given) Partner2 – positive Net Worth Partner1– positive Bidder 6– 04 nos. Positive of litigations (less than 50% of net worth) Partner2 – No pending litigation Bidder Pending No. Litigation 5 Partner1– No pending litigation Table continued $57 million Partner2 – $86 million Turnover Partner1– $911 million Require. – $14.06million Assets and line of credit – $72million and $56.5million Partner2 – Assets and line of credit – $46million and $10million Cash Flow Capacity Partner1– Assets and line of credit – $514 million and $4million Yes Partner2 – Yes Partner1– Yes 01project WW collection and pumping $21.26 million (jointly $42.52 million) 01 project relocation of SW and FH pump houses $19.44 million, 01 project WW TP expansion $21.48million, 01 project WW PS improvement $2.15million 01 project WS $54.26million, 01 project WW collection, pumping, treatment $30.04million (vvvvv) Partner2 – 01 project WW treatment with pumping $34.71million (vvvvv) Partner2 – 01 project of rehabilitation of 6 pumping stations capacity from 3L/s to 520L/s Experience Partner1– none 01 project with none capacity 1186L/s Partner1– 03 Partner1– 01 projects water project with treatment and capacity 103L/ supply. 01 project sec wastewater treatment with Partner2 – 01 contract value of project with $10.8m. Out of 4 capacity 1,302L/ projects 2 projects sec are not within last 5 years. Qualification Criteria Partner1– xyz Partner1– none none 2200mm dia. Steel pipe using pipe jacking for 1200m length Fail4 Remarks Pass continued on next page none Partner2 – Partner2 – no training Partner2 – 600mm to experience SCADA has been 1200mm carried out at a diameter sewer treatment plant pipes using pipe jacking method. project with no central monitoring Length of pipe jacking not given system and no certificate for the scope is given Partner1– SCADA for xyz EVALUATION EVALUATIONAND OF BIDDERS’S QUALIFICATION QUALIFICATION BID DATA CRITERIA SHEET 159 9. 8. 7. 6. 5. 4. 3. 2. $291.32 million $1,223 million (only 3 years given) Turnover $2,599 million Require. – $44.91million Assets – $192.4million7 Require. – $113.9m Yes Assets – Assets Yes and line of credit – $1,757.84m & $20m Require. – $37.7million Cash Flow Capacity Assets – Assets Yes and line of credit - $1030million zzzz WW treatment project capacity 12,731.48L/sec Env. sanitation project capacity 17,361L/s (yyyy city) 01 project WS (uuuu) SCADA by sub contractors zzzz WW 01 project with treatment project SCADA designing renovation and and installation rehabilitation of inflow PS Pass8 Pass9 Pass7 xxxx WW Fail6 treatment project education and operating BEChnique Remarks En v. sanitation Pass5 project training on O & M (yyyy city) 400mm to one project DBO 1800mm dia. with training trenchless pipe by (Kodungaiyur) subcontractor 01 project natural gas pipe not considered 02 projects with no dig technology - 300mmdia. 3.9016km length - 800mm to 1,100mm dia. 2.199km length and 400mm dia. 55m length 01 project 600mm dia. 30000m length Experience Subcontractor 1 – Subcontractor Subcontractor 03 projects 2 – 5 projects with 3 01 project more than 6 PS 1000mmdia., in WS 1200mm dia. & 1500mm dia. and 2300m total length one project by capacity from 689 01 project (ttttt) $58.09million to 2302L/sec (Baraki Purification plant) 01 project capacity 1971L/ 01 project WW sec treatment plant $44.87 million (wwww) 01 project WW treatment with PS renovation $45.84 million 01 project WW treatment with PS $61. 02 projects WW treatment $65.79million and $230 million (vvvv) WW treatment Qualification Criteria ead Partner’s (Partner1) similar projects submitted are building construction and hence the Lead Partner does not fulfill selection criteria. Additionally the partner’s (Partner2) $24.8 million project is L unclear whether Water Supply or Wastewater and the cost given in FC or US dollars. Lead Partner’s (CAMEC) similar projects submitted are flood control and irrigation and 01 storm water project. The scope of work of Xxxx River Sewage Project of partner (Partner2) does not cover construction of pumping stations. It is only building renovation work. Hence not similar. Similar projects submitted are water supply and hence does not similar in scope. Experience on key activities is not given. Both similar projects are water supply projects. Key activities submitted are not by the bidder and also with inadequate details. Bidder submitted clarifications on the cost of the similar project by Lead Partner and key activity experience. One project submitted for similar project requirement by the bidder is a water supply project and other four projects are wastewater projects but the contract values are lower than the requirement specified. Also bidder does not comply with some of the key activity experience. Similar projects experience on construction of pumping stations was not clear. Translation of sub contractor’s experience on working in live systems was not certified. Sub contractor’s experience on SCADA was not clear. Sub contractor’s experience on micro tunneling was not clear. Clarifications were sought from the bidder. Bidder has submitted FIN - 1 for 3 years. Experience of SCADA work was not within last 5 years. Clarifications were sought from the bidder. Bidder has not submitted documentary evidence for the key activity working in live sewerage system and the documentary proof for SCADA works is unsigned. Clarifications were sought from the bidder. Positive Bidder 9 – No pending litigation 9 1. Positive Bidder 8 – No pending litigation Net Worth Positive 8 Bidder Pending No. Litigation 7 Bidder 7– No pending litigation Table continued 160 APPENDIX 4 161 Appendix 5 Table 3: Substantial Responsiveness of Bids (Commercial Terms) Sr. No. Requirements 1. Power of Attorney 2. Signature on Bid Form 3. 4. Bidding Doc. Reference Bidder No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Section 1 – 18.2 Section 2 – 18.2 PC1 C PC2 C C PC3 C and Schedule Section 2 – 18.2 C C C C C C C Joint Venture Agreement or Formal Intent to Enter into an Agreement Section 1 – 11.1(h) C C NA NA C NA NA (a) Bidder Section 1 – Clause 4 C C C C C C C (b) Goods and Services Section 1 – Clause 5 C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C NC R R R R R R Eligibility 5. Major Equipment Maker 6. Contract Execution Schedule Section 6 Completion 1,092 days CONCLUSION C = Complied, R = Responsive PC = Partially Complied NR = Not Responsive NC = Not Complied NI = Not Indicated; clarification will be required NA = Not Applicable 162 Appendix 5 Attachment 1 Details on Eligibility of Bidders No. Requirements Bidding Documents Reference 1 Single Entity or Joint Venture Section 1, Clause 4.1 Bidder No.1 Bidder No. 2 Bidder No. 3 Bidder No. 4 Bidder No. 5 Bidder No. 6 Bidder No. 7 Y Y NA NA Y NA NA Y Y Y Y Y Y Y If Joint Venture, all partners must be jointly and severally laible. 2 Bidder must be a Section 1, national of an eligible Clause 4.2 ADB member country. Proposed subcontractors or Suppliers must be nationals of an eligible ADB member country country. 3 Conflict of Interest Section 1, Clause 4.3 None None None None None None None 4 Declared Ineligible by ADB Section 1, Clause 4.4 No No No No No No No 5 Governmentowned enterprise in Employer’s country to be legally and financially autonomous, operate under commercial law, and not dependent agency of the Section 1, Clause 4.5 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 6 Not having been declared ineligible based on a United Nations resolution. Section 1, Clause 4.7 No No No No No No No 163 Appendix 6 Table 4: Salient Technical Features of Bids (Technical Proposals) Attached Legend Description Yes Fulfilled Scope of Works and/or Meets Required Specifications FC As above but the matter requires Further Clarification or Confirmation NI No Information provided in the bid. No Not Fulfilled Scope of Work or Did Not Comply with Specifications 164 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION XXXXXX SECOND STAGE BID EVALUATION REPORT (PRICE PROPOSALS) FOR WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT— Designing, Construction, Installation, Rehabilitation and Maintenance of Wastewater Pumping Stations of XXXXXX TWO STAGE BIDDING PROCEDURE BID No. 01/ICB/Works/03/20xx ADB LOAN No. XXXXXXX XXXXXX WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT 9 September 20xx SECOND STAGE BID EVALUATION REPORT Contents 1. Introduction................................................................................................................................................. 167 1.1 General......................................................................................................................................................................................167 1.2 Submission of Bids................................................................................................................................................................167 1.3 Bid Opening.............................................................................................................................................................................167 1.4 Basic Data and Exchange Rates.......................................................................................................................................167 1.5 Bid Evaluation Committee.................................................................................................................................................168 2. Examination of Bids.................................................................................................................................... 168 2.1 List of Bidders.........................................................................................................................................................................168 2.2 Bid Documents (Technical Proposal)...........................................................................................................................168 2.3 Propriety of Signature and Power of Attorney...........................................................................................................169 3. Determination of Substantial Responsiveness of Bids.......................................................................... 169 3.1 Eligibility of Bidders and Goods.......................................................................................................................................169 3.2 Bidder’s Qualifications........................................................................................................................................................169 3.3 Compliance with Commercial Terms and Conditions............................................................................................169 4. Detailed Evaluation of Technical Requirements.................................................................................................. 170 4.1 Selection of Bids for Detailed Evaluation.....................................................................................................................170 4.2 Time for Completion/Contract Execution Schedule..............................................................................................170 4.3 Terms of Payment and Commercial Terms and Conditions.................................................................................170 4.4 Evaluation of Technical Requirements.........................................................................................................................171 4.5 Technical Responsiveness of Bids...................................................................................................................................176 5. Examination of Price Proposals.........................................................................................................177 5.1 Arithmetic Check, Corrections and Conversions to Local Currency................................................................177 6. Evaluation/Comparison of Price Proposals.....................................................................................177 6.1 Evaluation of Price Proposals............................................................................................................................................177 6.2 Comparison of Price Proposals and Determination of the Lowest Evaluated Bid.......................................178 6.3 Reasonableness of Price of the Lowest Evaluated Bid............................................................................................178 7. Conclusions and Recommendations.................................................................................................178 165 166 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION Appendixes l Record of Bid Opening............................................................................................................................................................179 2 Basic Data Sheet........................................................................................................................................................................181 3 Table 1: Summary of Bid Prices (Arithmetic Corrections and Corrected Bid Prices)�� 182 4 Table 2: Salient Features of Technical Requirements.................................................................................................183 5 Table 3: Bid Price Comparison with Price Adjustments.............................................................................................184 6 Table 4.1: Bid Price of Bidder No. 1 (Arithmetic Corrections and Corrected Bid Prices)�� 185 7 Table 5: Bid Price Comparison�� 189 SECOND STAGE BID EVALUATION REPORT 1. Introduction 1.1 General The xxxxxx has received a loan from the Asian Development Bank (ADB) to finance the cost of implementing the xxxxxx Wastewater Management Project. It is intended that part of the funds be used for eligible payments under the contract for “Designing, Construction, Installation, and Rehabilitation of Wastewater Pumping Stations of xxxxx xxxxxx” for which these bids have been invited. ADB Two Stage bidding procedure has been adopted for this procurement. As per the procedure given in the Instructions to Bidders, the invitations to submit second stage bids were issued on 10 June 20xx, to four responsive and qualified bidders from the First-Stage Bid evaluation. Along with this invitation, the bidders have been issued with “Changes Pursuant to First Stage Bid Evaluation” as per Sub-Clause 27.5, and Addendum No. 3 as per Sub-Clause 28.1(a) of Section 1 of the bidding document. Copies of the invitations together with above documents were forwarded to ADB when issuing to bidders. 1.2 Submission of Bids The closing time of bid submission was extended till 2 p.m. on 14 August 20xx. Accordingly the receipt of bids was closed at 2 p.m. local time on 14 August 20xx. All four qualified and invited bidders submitted the second stage bids. 1.3 Bid Opening Bids were opened as scheduled, at 2 p.m. on 14 August 20xx at the Chief Accountant’s Office of the Ministry of XXXXXXXX, by the Bid Opening Committee, in the presence of representatives of bidders. The bidders’ names were announced and recorded. The Bid Opening Committee opened the envelopes of the Technical proposals and price proposal and examined the documents. All the necessary papers, forms and schedules were signed by the members of Committee on each of the envelopes. The Record of Bid Opening was prepared soon after the bids were announced. A copy of the record is attached as Appendix 1. 1.4 Basic Data and Exchange Rates The key information of the bidding process was collected so that it would be readily available. The basic information pertaining to the bidding was summarized and is presented in Appendix 2. The currency for bid comparison is local currency. The exchange rates used for the evaluation were the selling rates 28 days prior to the deadline for submission of bids published by the Central Bank of XXXXXXX. Accordingly the selling rates of US dollar and euro were obtained from the official source of the Central Bank of XXXXXXX. As the Central Bank does not calculate the selling rates for currency FC3, BEC decided to use the Central Bank’s web based exchange rate for converting currency yyy to xxx. 167 168 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION 1.5 Bid Evaluation Committee A Bid Evaluation Committee (BEC) comprising the following four senior officers of xxxxxx had been formed by the Executive Director: (1) Chairman Additional Secretary (2) Member Chief Accountant (Expenditure and Monitoring) (3) Member Deputy Director Engineering. (4) Member Mechanical Engineer –Pumping Stations (5) Member/ Secretary Project Director The Committee decisions have been made on the basis of detailed discussions and views and the final decision was unanimous. 2. E xamination of Bids 2.1 List of Bidders The names of the bidders and their nationalities are shown in the following table. Bidder No. 2.2 Name Nationality 1 Bidder No. 1 JV: PRC–Malaysia 2 Bidder No. 2 Republic of Korea 3 Bidder No. 3 Republic of Korea 4 Bidder No. 4 India Bid Documents (Technical Proposal) The Technical proposals submitted were examined to verify that the bidders had submitted all the documents and information required by the bidding documents. The following were verified: i. Letter of Second Stage Bid ii. Completed schedules as required, including Price Schedules iii. Bid Security iv. Written confirmation authorizing the signatory of the bid v.Updated First-Stage Bid, comprising any modifications required to the First-Stage Bid as recorded in the “Changes Required Pursuant to FirstStage Evaluation” vi.Documentary evidence establishing any additional or varied plant and services and not included in the First-Stage Bid vii.Documentary evidence regarding any changes between the time of submitting the First-Stage and the Second-Stage Bids SECOND STAGE BID EVALUATION REPORT viii.Documentary evidence establishing any additional or varied facilities in accordance with the requirements of “Changes Required Pursuant to First Stage Evaluation” are Technically acceptable ix.Subcontractors additional to or different from those named in the FirstStage Bid for major items of supply or services The results of checking for completeness of bid documents are presented in Table 1: Examination of Completeness of Bid Documents, and attached as Appendix 3. 2.3 Propriety of Signature and Power of Attorney All documents had been signed in accordance with Instructions to Bidders and corrections had been also initialed by the authorized person. The powers of attorney for the signatory of all the bidders were acceptable. The information is included in Table 1, Appendix 3. 3. D etermination of Substantial Responsiveness of Bids 3.1 Eligibility of Bidders and Goods In Clauses 4 and 5 of the Instructions to Bidders of the bidding documents it was specified that the bidder, and the goods and the services to be supplied shall be an eligible source country of ADB. Bidder No. 3 has not stated clearly the origin of the items comprising the Plant. All other bidders submitted certifications and necessary documentation which indicated that they are nationals of an eligible member country of ADB. Further all bidders submitted certification that they were not involved in the consulting services associated with this contract. The results of checking are presented in Table 2: Substantive Responsiveness of Second-Stage Bids, and attached as Appendix 4. 3.2 Bidder’s Qualifications The bidding documents required, in Clause 15 of Instructions to Bidders, that each bidder submit with the bid, evidence of its Technical capability, financial capacity and previous experience in similar works by completing the forms and schedules provided in the bidding documents. All bidders have submitted updated information by completing due forms and schedules satisfactorily. The results of the review were summarized in Table 3: Evaluation of Changes of Bidders’ Qualifications and are attached as Appendix 5. 3.3 Compliance with Commercial Terms and Conditions 3.3.1 Bid Validity and Bid Security The bid validity period of at least 119 days from the date of Second-Stage Bid submission was specified in ITB 33.1 of Section 2 of the bidding documents. All the bidders offered the bid validity period as required. A bid security amounting to $800,000 or LC 100,000,000.00 valid for a period of 147 days from the date of Second-Stage Bid submission was specified in ITB 34.1 of Section 2 of the bidding documents. All the bidders offered the bid security as required. 169 170 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION 4. D etailed Evaluation for Technical Requirements 4.1 Selection of Bids for Detailed Evaluation As discussed in Section 3 of this report, all bids submitted by the four bidders were determined as substantially responsive to the bidding documents. The ranking in order of the lowest bid price is as follows. Arithmetically corrected bid price in the table excludes the taxes and duties of Price Schedules 1 and 2 and includes provisional sum under Price Schedule 4. In order to check Price Schedules all four bidders were advised to submit the soft copies of the Price Schedules by the EA. Accordingly, all four bidders submitted the soft copies of the Price Schedules. Examination of Price proposals is dealt with in Paragraph 5 of this report. No. Name of Bidder As Opened Bid Price in LC Arithmetically Corrected Bid Price in LC Ranking 1 Bidder No. 1 11,466,773,500.50 10,681,472,747.00 4 2 Bidder No. 2 10,218,482,093.54 10,218,482,092.00 3 3 Bidder No. 3 6,859,522,661.88 6,859,522,661.88 1 4 Bidder No. 4 8,219,545,951.89 7,531,446,148.00 2 In order to reduce the volume of work involved in the detailed Technical evaluation, it was decided to evaluate initially only the two lowest bids. Other bids would be evaluated only if adjustments, if any, to be made to the two lowest bids would bring their adjusted price above the adjusted price of any of the other bids. Accordingly, only bids Nos. 3 and 4 were initially evaluated and, since the adjusted prices of these two bids were lower than the adjusted price of any of the other two bids, detailed evaluation of the higher bids were not necessary. The detail comments of the Technical proposals of these two bidders are given in Appendix 8. This gives the examination of changes submitted by Bidders, under the memorandum “Changes Required Pursuant to First Stage Evaluation”. 4.2 Time for Completion/Contract Execution Schedule The contract execution schedules and sequence of delivery of major units of Plant were evaluated in detail and compared with the requirements of the bidding documents. The contract execution schedules submitted by bidders were generally in order. All the bidders proposed execution schedules met completion requirement of 36 months for the total scope of work. The results of the review were summarized in Table 2: Substantive Responsiveness of Second-Stage Bids and are attached as Appendix 4. 4.3 Terms of Payments and Commercial Terms and Conditions Two lowest bidders accepted the terms and conditions of the bidding documents with respect to payments and also accepted the price adjustment provisions and specified mechanism for the determination of price adjustments. Bidder SECOND STAGE BID EVALUATION REPORT No. 3 has not firmly stated the origin of the Plant as discussed under Para 4.4: Evaluation of Technical Requirements. The two bidders accepted the provisions for liquidated damages, functional guarantees and the corresponding adjustments and other stipulations for the supply and delivery of goods, warranty conditions and after sales services. The results of the review were summarized in Table 2: Substantive Responsiveness of Second-Stage Bids and are attached as Appendix 4. 4.4 Evaluation of Technical Requirements The contract execution schedules and sequence of delivery of major units of Plant were evaluated in detail and compared with the requirements of the bidding documents. The contract execution schedules submitted by bidders were generally in order. All the bidders proposed execution schedules met completion requirement of 36 months for the total scope of work. The results of the review were summarized in Table 2: Substantive Responsiveness of Second-Stage Bids and are attached as Appendix 4. [Note: Some items in the Bid Evaluation Report were omitted for brevity.] 4.4.1 (a) Technical Specifications Bidder No. 3 The Technical Proposal of the bidder was not clear enough to understand the updated sections of the proposal as no reference has been given to the Changes Required Pursuant to First Stage Evaluation issued to the bidder. Hence BEC advised the PE to request the bidder to clarify and submit the changes made as per the memorandum entitled “Changes Required Pursuant to First Stage Bid Evaluation” and Addendum 3. Accordingly the bidder submitted the details. BEC examined the Second-Stage Bid based on this submission. The bidder has proposed to use existing grit chambers with a grit removal efficiency of 45% for pumping stations identified for rehabilitation without optimizing as expected by the Employer. 45% efficiency for grit removal is not acceptable. In the Changes Required Pursuant to First-Stage Bid Evaluation the bidder has been advised to provide a Technical solution for addressing the serious grit problem. However the bidder has failed to provide an acceptable solution with the Second-Stage Bid. This is a major technical requirement, and bidder’s indicated removal efficiency is not acceptable as it will adversely affect the pump, performance. Hence, the BEC considers this bid as technically nonresponsive under Sub-Clause 43.2 of Section 1 of the bidding documents. The bidder has mentioned under the country of manufacturer the name of an eligible country along with a statement “or an available country.” Hence, the eligibility of the plants offered cannot be evaluated as per ITB14. If the bidder is the successful bidder, the bidder must comply with the requirements of the ADB eligible country. The bidder has offered several alternative makes for the items of plant; such as main pumps, grit pumps, grit classifier, coarse screen, screw conveyor, screen 171 172 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION compactor and booster pumps from different manufacturers, but giving only one Technical Schedule for all makes. Therefore out of the range of the equipment, which make of equipment meets the required specification cannot be assessed. Hence, the BEC is not in a position to determine whether the offered items are available with the bidder’s proposed manufacturers and conforming to the Employer’s Requirements. This will adversely affect the detailed design. BEC considers this as a serious non conformity as clear instructions had been issued to submit separate schedules for each make and model offered. Hence, this bid is a nonresponsive bid under Subclause 43.2 of Section 1 of the bidding document. (b) Bidder No. 4 Bidder has proposed vortex type grit removal mechanism with the grit removal efficiency of 97% of girt larger than 0.212 mm for all the pumping stations. This complies with the Employer’s Requirement. The bidder has offered manufacturers and local agents for all major plant and equipment except for instrumentation, SCADA software and ICA panels for instrumentations. The manufacturers and local agents proposed for major plant and equipment are acceptable and comply with the Employer’s Requirement. BEC recommends the bidder to rectify the arrangement proposed for instrumentation, SCADA software, ICA panels and any other equipment that he has offered without naming the agent, by proposing an acceptable manufacturer and local agent before awarding the contract if the bidder is the successful bidder. Bidder’s proposal for pumping station layouts is acceptable and is subject to changes during the review of the designs during implementation stage. This is acceptable. Bidder’s external layout plans of each pumping stations do not show the drainage plans, which can be carried out at the design review stage during implementation. The proposal by the bidder for designing and construction of force mains does not include odor control arrangement. Bidder needs to study and provide this arrangement during detailed design stage. 4.4.2 (a) Construction Schedules and Sequence of Construction Bidder No. 3 Bidder has submitted the Resource Schedule for manpower and Construction Schedule. The Construction Schedule proposes to have a design period of first 9 months continuously. The delay in commencing the construction period of first group to the beginning of eight month would result in delays in completion of the subsequent work under the bid. The Construction Programme also shows that the bidder has not considered the amended grouping given in the Annex 1 to Addendum No. 3. Training of Employer’s personnel has been limited only to a period of 1 month whereas the bidding document requires training period of 6 months simultaneously with the Commissioning Period. BEC noted that this does not comply with the requirement. The program tallies with the overall contract period. SECOND STAGE BID EVALUATION REPORT Program does not include the resource mobilization plan for Plant. Bidder refers to the bid of Stage 1 for items of Plant, which is not acceptable. This omission is not a major issue for this evaluation. (b) Bidder No. 4 Bidder has developed a work plan covering each work group as proposed in the bidding document covering all key activities. Proposed work plan is acceptable at this stage. However, the Construction Programme shows that the bidder has not considered the amended grouping given in the Annex 1 to Addendum No. 3.BEC did not consider this as a major deviation. The program tallies with the overall contract period. Program includes resource (equipment and manpower) mobilization plans. Proposed equipment (type and size) is adequate and is commensurate with the construction method mostly. Only key item of equipment which was not included in the list is microtunnelling machine(s). BEC did not consider this as a major deviation. Bidder also includes labor deployment plan which is acceptable. 4.4.3 (a) Contractor’s Organization and Personnel Bidder No. 3 Bidder has provided information on contract management organization. The proposed organization covers for design and construction. The commissioning period is not covered. This is considered as a minor deviation. Bidder shall submit a detailed and complete organization arrangement upon award of the contract, if the bidder is the selected bidder. Bidder proposed personnel for only limited number of positions. However, except for the positions of: Contractor’s Representative; for the other positions the Bidder could be allowed to proposed suitable candidates before awarding the Contract, if the bidder is the selected bidder. The bidder’s candidate for Lead Design Engineer is not acceptable as the candidate does not have experience of managing multidisciplinary design team as required in the work under this bid. The proposed candidate for the Construction Manager position does not possess experience in managing rehabilitation projects. This position shall also be replaced with a suitable candidate if the bidder is the selected bidder. Proposed Training Expert does not have adequate relevant experience. For most of the positions the bidder has proposed non-professionally qualified personnel and most of them are in-house staff of the bidder working in number of projects of the bidder in XXXXX. BEC has the doubt whether the proposed personnel are available in full-time basis for the project. If the bidder is the selected bidder, the bidder shall be required to propose suitably qualified and experienced personnel fully available for the contract. 173 174 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION (b) Bidder No. 4 Bidder has provided information on contract management organization separately for design and construction and commissioning periods. It is acceptable. Bidder has proposed personnel for key positions. However, except for the positions of: Contractor’s Representative; Lead Design Engineer; and Construction Manager, for the other positions, the Bidder could be allowed to propose suitable candidates before awarding the Contract, if the bidder is the selected bidder, pursuant to Para 2.5 of Section 3 of the Bidding Document. Bidder’s candidate for Construction Manager has adequate experience. Bidder’s proposal for Environmental Manager and H&S manager are nonlocals. Past experience indicates that locals are better suited for these two positions which need fluency in local language(s). Therefore BEC of the view that the bidder shall be requested to appoint locals for these two positions, if the bidder is the selected bidder. 4.4.4 (a) Subcontractors Bidder No. 3 Bidder has provided a list of subcontractors, only for items of Plant and electrical items supplies and subcontracting. The list shows numbers of subcontractors for plant and electrical items. If the bidder is the successful bidder the approved list of manufacturers/subcontractors will be finalized before signing the contract as per ITB 29.1(i) of the bidding documents. Accordingly it is assumed that designs and civil works will be carried out by the bidder himself, if the bidder is the selected bidder. However, as per his proposals his design team seems entirely consisting of locals. BEC is of the view that design capability of the proposed arrangement with multidisciplinary approach is limited when the complicated scope of the work under this contract is considered. Bidder has proposed to submit detailed CVs of proposed design personnel after awarding the Contract and this is not acceptable. Therefore BEC recommends that the bidder to submit his arrangement for carrying out the design in detail prior to award of the contract, if he is the selected bidder. The bidder has provided manufacturer’s authorization for major items of Plant. However the bidder’s proposal for the Country of Origin is not acceptable as the bidder has stated it will be supplied from manufacturer’s country or available country. This is not acceptable. (b) Bidder No. 4 Bidder has provided list of subcontractors, which included plant suppliers. The bidder has clearly stated the subcontractors for items of plant. Suitability of plant suppliers under Process/Mechanical/Electrical and Instrumentation had been given under 4.4.1(b). SECOND STAGE BID EVALUATION REPORT Civil and Electromechanical subcontractors proposed are: (i) Subcontractor 1 - Acceptable (ii) Subcontractor 2 - Acceptable (iii) Subcontractor 3 - Accepted subject to scope of work to be allocated. (iv)Subcontractor 4 - Acceptable for E&M work but not for civil work (only Grade 6) (v) Subcontractor 5 - Acceptable (vi) Subcontractor 6 - Acceptable All subcontractors have provided letters on intent to work as subcontractors. Works assigned to each subcontractor are to be agreed at the contract execution stage if the bidder is the successful bidder. 4.4.5 (a) Civil and Structural Approach Bidder No. 3 Design will be primarily based on British Standards and proposed standards are acceptable. Bidder has not provided the details of design software that he might use. If selected, bidder shall provide the details of the design software that he will use before the commencement of design work and obtain the Project Manager’s (PM) approval. Bidder has provided information on design criteria, which were not required at this stage. (b) Bidder No. 4 Design will be based entirely on British Standards and is acceptable. Bidder has not provided the details of design software that he might use. If selected, bidder shall provide the details of the design software that he will use before the commencement of design work and obtain the PM’s approval. 4.4.6 (a) Construction Method Statement Bidder No. 3 Bidder has covered all the major areas of construction activities. However descriptive statements are not provided as to how for health and safety of workmen, acceptability of repair/maintenance work, cleaning work and natural lighting and ventilation etc. are maintained in pumping station planning. Method statement has discussed by-pass arrangement for each pump station. However overflow arrangement has not been dealt in the proposal. The method statement submitted is adequate at this stage. Following areas are covered in the method statement: • Demolition work • Renewal of existing equipment 175 176 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION • Installation and erection of mechanical/electrical equipment • Sewer by passing •Work involved with pump station construction including structural investigations • Force main construction (b) Bidder No. 4 Bidder has well covered all the major areas of construction activities, and presented in a form of a checklist covering different aspects that he will be looked into during construction. Bidder’s method statement clearly demonstrates that he has understood the scope of work and activities entailed in the scope. Method statement is organized addressing each site separately and the issues specific to site were reasonably captured. No significant discrepancy between the scope of work and bidders method. Hence the method statement submitted is adequate at this stage. Following areas are covered in the method statement: • Overflow • Demolition work • Renewal of existing equipment • Installation and erection of mechanical/electrical equipment • Sewer by passing • Inverted siphon • Force man construction • All pump Stations • Workshops 4.5 Technical Responsiveness of Bids On the basis of analysis of Technical proposals of these two bidders, that the bid of Bidder No. 3 does not meet the requirements of the Bidding Document and the Memorandum entitled “Changes Required Pursuant to First Stage Evaluation.” Hence the BEC is not in a position to evaluate the bid to assess whether the bid meets the Employer’s Requirements or not and hence is considered as Technically non-responsive pursuant to ITB 43.2. If such nonconformities are rectified would unfairly affect the competitive position of other Bidders presenting substantially responsive bids as per ITB 43.2 (b). The Technical proposal of Bidder No. 4 is considered as substantially responsive to the Employer’s Requirements. However there are some deficiencies as described in paragraph 4.4.1 (b). BEC considers that these deficiencies are not of categories coming under material deviation, reservation or omission as pursuant ITB 43.2. Hence BEC considers that the contract can be awarded to the bidder with condition to rectify the stipulated deficiencies coming under Section 1- ITB 29.1(i) and Para 2.5 of Section 3 of the Bidding Document. SECOND STAGE BID EVALUATION REPORT 5. E xamination of Price Proposals The price proposals submitted were first examined to ensure that the bidders had submitted the Letter of Second Stage bid and the Price Schedules with Sub Schedules as given in Section 4 of the bidding documents and whether these documents had been prepared properly and signed as stipulated in the Instructions to Bidders. Documents of all bidders were satisfactory as all bid documents were signed and corrections were initialed by the authorized person. 5.1 Arithmetic Check, Corrections and Conversion to Local Currency Each Subschedules and Schedules of the bidders were checked for arithmetic errors. Errors were corrected in accordance with the stipulations in the bidding documents. These corrections, none of which are substantial, were tabulated and are shown in Appendix 6: Tables 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, and 4.4 Arithmetic Corrections and Corrected Bid Prices. Furthermore, to facilitate evaluation and comparison of bids, the bid prices expressed in US dollars, euro, and Indian rupees were converted into local currency at the selling exchange rates established by the Central Bank of XXXXX on 17 July 20xx. (a) Bidder No. 3 No arithmetic corrections were found in the Price Schedules and also in the Letter of Second Stage Bid. However, the Price Schedules did not appear to include the Mandatory Spare parts, which the Contractor is obliged to supply under the Contract, and no list of such spares that would be supplied, had been provided in the Bid. As this implies that the bidder would not provide the mandatory spares, this is another reason to consider this bid as nonresponsive. (b) Bidder No. 4 Bidder has added sub schedules for XX, xxxxxxx and yyyyyyy pumping stations under Price Schedules 1,2, and 4. The scope of work in these three pumping stations under this bid is limited to revamping the existing SCADA systems, the cost of which is provided under a Provisional Sum. Hence the cost of subschedules for these three pumping stations under Price Schedules 1,2, and 4 were not taken to the corrected bid price. 6. E valuation/ Comparison of Price Proposals 6.1 Evaluation of Price Proposals The scope of work and supply, Technical information, Technical data, manufacturers and subcontractors were scrutinized in detail and compared with the requirements of the bidding documents. As stated in Para 4.1 above, only the bids of Bidder No. 3 and 4 were evaluated as the adjusted prices of these two bids were lower than the adjusted price of any of the other two bids. The salient requirements of these two bids affecting the prices were summarized and attached as Appendix 8. Therefore no price adjustments would be required for missing items or unacceptable items. 177 178 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION 6.2Comparison of Price Proposals and Determination of the Lowest Evaluated Bid The arithmetically corrected bid prices including discounts were summarized in Table 5: Bid Price Comparison and attached to this report as Appendix 7. As that comparison shows, the lowest evaluated substantially responsive bid is that submitted by Bidder No. 4. The evaluated bid price is LC 7,531,446,148.00 excluding taxes and duties in Schedules 1 and 2 and excludes Provisional Sum under Subschedule 4.17. 6.3 Reasonable Price of the Lowest Evaluated Bid Reasonable care has been taken in the bidding document to prevent front loading through the Terms of Payment. Hence there is no risk to the Employer. The rates in the Subschedule No. 4.17–General, are reasonable. The corrected bid price of bidder No. 4 is 7.13% higher than the Executing Agency’s estimate of LC 7,029,824,200.00. 7. C onclusions and Recommendations On the basis of the systematic evaluation of bids, which had been carried out in accordance with the provisions of the bidding documents, it was concluded that Bidder No. 4 had submitted the lowest evaluated substantially responsive bid. It is recommended that the contract for the Designing, Construction, Installation, and Rehabilitation of Wastewater Pumping Stations of xxxxxx be awarded to Bidder No. 4 at the corrected bid price of FC1 5,672,980, FC2 10,942,198, FC3 268,292,593 and LC 4,576,155,239.00 (excluding taxes and duties from Schedules 1 and 2). Changes to be agreed by the Bidder prior to award of the contract are given in a separate appendix. 179 Appendix 1 Page 1 of 2 Record of Bid Opening ADB Loan No.xxxxxxx Project Title : xxxxxx Wastewater Management Project Bid No. ICB/Works/03/2013Bid Title : Designing, Construction, Installation, Rehabilitation, Operation and Maintenance of Wastewater Pumping Stations 1. The following bids were received by the deadline fixed, 14 August 20xx at 2 p.m. and were publicly opened and read at 2 p.m. on the same date Bid Price Name of Bidders Bidder, No. 1 Foreign Local FX Price Proposal Bidder No. 2 LC 45,229,925 Bidder, No. 3 Price Proposal FX Discount Signature of Representative LC - 5,513,610,772 FX 100 million 50,000,000 FX Price Proposal Bid Security Amount Signed LC 19,611,817.01 7,637,174,740 $800,000 5.5% Signed LC 2,762,215,227 $800,000 - Signed $800,000 - Signed 31,129,824 Bidder No. 4 FX1 5,672,980 LC Price Proposal FX210,942,199 5,176,497,445 FX3271,154,891 2. The bidders’ representatives who attended the public opening of price proposals are listed in the copy of the attendance sheet attached as an annex of this record. 3. The following Bid Opening Committee members attended the public opening of bids Bid Opening Committee Name of Member Ministry/Department Designation Member 1 PMU DPD (Eng.) Member 2 PMU Proj. Eng. (Proc.) Member 3 PMU Accountant 4. Signature Reading and signing of documents ended at 2 .45 pm. Signed Signed Signed DPD (Eng.) Proj. Eng. (Proc.) Accountant PMU PMU PMU 180 GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION Page 2 of 2 Attendance Sheet at Opening of Bids Loan No. xxxxxx Bid No. ICB/Works/03/20xx Project Title : xxxxx Wastewater Management Project Date: 14 August 20xx Place : The office of the Chief Accountant, Ministry of yyyyyy, Block “C”, No. 330, Union Place, zzzzz, XXXX Time: 2 p.m. The following bidders’ representatives attended the public opening of bids. Representative Ser. No. Bidder Name Designation 1 Bidder No. 1 aaaaa DGM 2 Bidder No. 2 bbbbb Manager 3 Bidder No. 3 cccccc Manager 4 Bidder No. 4 ddddd DGM Signature 181 Appendix 2 Basic Data Sheet 1. Project Title : XXXXXXX Wastewater Management Project 2. Loan Number : xxxx 3. Bid Title :P rocurement of Designing, Construction, Installation, Rehabilitation, Operation and Maintenance of Wastewater Pumping Stations of XXXXXX 4. Bid Number : ICB/Works/03/20xx 5. Estimated Value : FX 53.41million 6. Date for Invitation for Second Stage bids : 10.06.2014 7. Mode of Procurement : I nternational Competitive Bidding Two Stage Bidding Procedure 8. Bid Closing Date and Time : 14.08.20xx at 2.00pm 9. Bid Opening Date and Time : 14.08.20xx at 2.00pm 10. Number of Bids Received :4 11. Bid Validity Period :119 Days from Second Stage bid submission date 12. Bid Security Amount : $800,000 or LC100,000,000.00 13. Date of Determining Applicable Exchange Rate : 17.07.2014 14. Exchange Rates for Evaluation : 1FX1 = LC 131.62, 1FX2 = LC 178.88, FX3 = LC 2.1687 182 Appendix 3 Table 1: Examination of Completeness of Bid Documents Bidder No./Name Item Description 1 2 3 4 Bidder No. 1 Bidder No. 2 Bidder No. 3 Bidder No. 4 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y1 Y Y Y Y2 Y Y Y Y P3 Y Y Y Y Y NE Y Y NE P3 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y NE P3 Y 1 Bid Documents (Second-Stage Bid) 1.1 One original, 1 copy Y 1.2 Letter of Second Stage Bid Y 1.3 Completed Schedules – Price Schedules and Technical Schedules Y 1.4 Bid Security Y 1.5 Authorization of signatory of Bid to commit Y 1.6 Updated First Stage Bid Y 1.7 Evidence of eligibility of additional or varied Plant and Services Y 1.8 Evidence of any changes occurred between submitting First-Stage bids and Second-Stage Bids, having an effect on Bidder’s eligibility and qualification Y 1.9 1.10 2 2.1 2.2 2.3 Y = Yes P = Partial Evidence of any additional or varied facilities done accordance with “Changes Required Pursuant to First-Stage Evaluation” List of Subcontractors Propriety of Signature and Completeness Power of Attorney Letter of Second Stage Bids, properly signed or not Completeness of Bids N = No NA = Not Applicable 1/ format has modifications – no risk 2/ format has modifications – no risk 3/ eligibility of additional or varied plant cannot be evaluated 4/ bidders are not taken for detailed evaluation NE4 NE Y Y NE 183 Appendix 4 Table 2: Substantive Responsiveness of Second-Stage Bids Bidder No./Name Sr. No. Requirements 1 2 3 4 Bidding Doc. Reference Bidder No. 1 Bidder No. 2 Bidder No. 3 Bidder No. 4 1. Letter of Second Stage Bid and Schedules ITB 30.1 C C C C 2. Signature on Bid Forms and Schedules ITB 35 C C C C 3. Joint Venture Agreement ITB 35.3 C NA NA NA 4. Eligibility Bidder Goods and Services ITB 14 NE2 NE C NC1 C C 5. Bid Validity 119 days ITB 33 C C C C 6. Terms of Payment, Price Adjustment Method and Provisions Section 7 Clause 11 and 12 and Section 9 Appendix 1 NE NE C C 7. Functional Guarantees and Liquidated Damages Section 9 Appendix 8 NE NE C C 8. Contract Execution Schedule Section 4 NE NE C C NC1 C CONCLUSION C = Complied R = Responsive NE = Not Evaluated NC = Not Complied NR = Not Responsive NA = Not Applicable NI = Not Indicated: clarification will be required 1/ The country of origin of plant and equipment has not been firmly given 2/ Bidders not considered for detailed evaluation 184 Appendix 5 Table 3: Evaluation of Changes in Bidders’ Qualifications Qualification Pending Net Litigation worth Turnover Cash flow Capacity Not more than 50% Should Not less than Current Contract Bidder of net be $25 million in commitments + No. worth positive last 3 years $5 million 1 No change No Partner1– Partner1– Assets and change $985 m line of credit – $5889 Partner2 – $86m million and $3 million 2 3 4 Specific Experience General Specific in Key Experience Experience Activity No change Partner2 – Assets and line of credit – $46m and $10m No change No $2,599,339,745 Assets and line of No change change credit – USD Require. – $37.7 m No change No change No $1,329.13 change million No $8,300 million change Assets and line of No change credit – $1,237.57 million and $10 million Require. – $241.74 million Assets – $8,171 million Require. – $2,621 million No change Remarks No change No change No change No change No change No change No change No change No change No change No change No change No new projects awarded after submitting this bid have been submitted by any of the bidders. 22,660,000 735,206,268 800,947,690 Amount 5,513,610,772 45,262,637 18,807,952 1,316,250 - 25,138,435 USD * Excluding taxes and duties from Schedules 1 and 2 and including provisional sum. FC1 81,153,872 LC LKR 3,954,796,814 LKR LKR LKR LC TOTAL BID PRICE EQUIVALENT IN FOREIGN CURRENCY 1 - - - - - Amount LC10,681,472,747 FC 3 TOTAL BID PRICE EQUIVALENT IN LOCAL CURRENCY - - - - - Amount 5,957,468,282 45,229,925 TOTAL FC 2 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Corrected Bid Price Corrected Bid Price in Equivalent LKR based on Selling Exchange Rate as at 17 July 2014 (28 days prior to deadline) USD = 131.62 18,807,952 Schedule 4 FC1 1,316,250 Schedule 3 25,105,723 - FC1 Amount Bid Price at Opening Table 4.1: Bid Price of Bidder No. 1 (Arithmetic Corrections and Corrected Bid Prices*) Schedule 2 Schedule 1 FC 1 Appendix 6 4,724,004,465 4,724,004,465 3,954,796,814 22,660,000 746,547,651 - LC 185 * - - - - - - - - - - FC 2 Amount FC 3 Amount LC LC LC LC LC 7,637,174,740 7,262,075,300 - 375,099,439 - Amount Excluding taxes and duties from Schedules 1 and 2 and including provisional sum. TOTAL BID PRICE EQUIVALENT IN FOREIGN CURRENCY 1 TOTAL BID PRICE EQUIVALENT IN LOCAL CURRENCY Corrected Bid Price in Equivalent LC based on Selling Exchange Rate as at 17 July 2014 (28 days prior to deadline) USD = 131.62 19,611,817 2,720,232 Schedule 4 FC1 2,137,355 Schedule 3 TOTAL - 14,754,229 Amount Schedule 2 Schedule 1 FC1 FC 1 Bid Price at Opening 19,611,817 2,720,232 2,137,355 2,581,307,353 - 14,754,230 FC1 - - - - - - - FC1 77,636,241 LC10,218,482,092 - - - - - - - Corrected Bid Price (Arithmetic Corrections and Corrected Bid Prices*) Table 4.2: Bid Price of Bidder No. 2 7,637,174,739 7,637,174,739 7,262,075,300 - 375,099,439 - LC 186 11,941,046 31,129,824 Schedule 4 TOTAL FC 2 - - - - - Amount FC 3 - - - - - Amount LC LC LC LC LC 2,762,215,227 2,543,753,738 85,288,205 133,173,284 - Amount *Excluding taxes and duties from Schedule 1 and 2 and including provisional sum. FC1 52,116,112 - TOTAL BID PRICE EQUIVALENT IN FOREIGN CURRENCY 1 - LC 6,859,522,661 4,097,307,434 31,129,824 11,941,046 19,188,778 FC1 Corrected Bid Price TOTAL BID PRICE EQUIVALENT IN LOCAL CURRENCY Corrected Bid Price in Equivalent LC based on Selling Exchange Rate as at 17 July 2014 (28 days prior to deadline) USD = 131.62 - Schedule 3 FC1 - 19,188,778 Schedule 1 FC1 Schedule 2 Amount FC 1 Bid Price at Opening (Arithmetic Corrections and Corrected Bid Prices*) Table 4.3: Bid Price of Bidder No. 3 2,762,215,227 2,762,215,227 2,543,753,738 85,288,205 133,173,284 - LC 187 * FC 2 LC 5,176,497,445 3,596,853,631 88,895,408 1,003,488,730 487,259,677 Amount 10,942,198 10,942,198 FC2 FC2 57,840,724 581,846,146 4,576,155,239 268,292,593 4,576,155,239 TOTAL BID PRICE EQUIVALENT IN FOREIGN CURRENCY 2 Excluding taxes and duties from Schedule 1 and 2 and including provisional sum. 89,465,307 895,687,566 - LC 1,560,731 3,591,002,366 266,731,862 FC3 LC 7,612,996,148 1,014,782,662 1,440,212,101 5,672,980 5,672,980 FC1 Corrected Bid Price TOTAL BID PRICE EQUIVALENT IN LOCAL CURRENCY Corrected Bid Price in Equivalent LC based on Selling Exchange Rate as at 17 July 2014 (28 days prior to deadline) FC1 = 178.88, FC2 = 131.62, INR = 2.1687 271,154,891 FC3 10,942,199 TOTAL FC1 5,672,980 FC2 LC 1,926,731 FC3 LC LC Schedule 4 269,228,160 Amount LC FC3 FC 3 Schedule 3 10,942,199 Amount LC FC1 5,672,980 FC2 Amount Schedule 2 Schedule 1 FC 1 Bid Price at Opening (Arithmetic Corrections and Corrected Bid Prices*) Table 4.4: Bid Price of Bidder No. 4 188 189 Appendix 7 Table 5: Bid Price Comparison (In Local Currency) Bids for Designing, Construction, Installation, and Rehabilitation of Wastewater Pumping Stations of XXXXXXXXX ICB Contract No: ICB/Works/03/2013 Schedule No. 1 2 3 4 Ranking * Title of Schedule Executing Agency’s Estimate Bidder No. 1 Bidder No. 2 Part A: Bid Price Plant and mandatory spare parts supplied 2,460,438,470 3,308,720,814 1,835,144,228 from abroad Plant and mandatory spare parts from 351,491,210 746,547,651 354,468,970 within XXXXX Design Services 105,447,363 195,904,825 265,846,076 Installation and other 4,112,447,157 6,380,299,456 7,201,006,030 services Sub-Total (1 to 4) 7,029,824,200 10,631,472,746 9,656,465,304 Bid Price Arithmetically 10,681,472,747 10,218,482,092 corrected Bid Price Corrected Bid Price excluding Prov: Sum 10,599,922,747 10,136,932,092 (LC81,550,000) LC 50 million 5.5% from Foreign Discounts from Schedule 4 and Local currency Discounted Price 10,549,922,747 9,579,400,827 Part B: Adjustments (a) Quantifiable Deviations and Nil *816,594,083 Omissions (b) Work,Services to be provided by Nil Nil the Employer Sub-Total (a + b) Nil 816,594,083 Total Evaluated Bid Price 7,029,824,200 10,549,922,747 10,395,994,910 (Part A plus Part B) 4 3 Due to non-addition of VAT for Schedule 4, subschedules 4.1 to 4.16. Bidder No. 3 Bidder No. 4 2,525,626,960 3,038,870,005 133,173,284 1,003,488,730 85,288,205 88,895,408 4,115,434,212 3,601,032,132 6,859,522,661 7,732,286,275 6,859,522,661 7,612,996,148 6,777,972,661 7,531,446,148 Nil Nil 6,777,972,661 7,531,446,148 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil 6,777,972,661 7,531,446,148 1 2 Guide on Bid Evaluation This guide is intended to provide guidance to borrowers on bid evaluation procedures and how to prepare a bid evaluation report to be submitted to ADB, in connection with the procurement of contracts financed in whole or in part by an ADB loan or grant, or by ADB-administered funds. About the Asian Development Bank ADB’s vision is an Asia and Pacific region free of poverty. Its mission is to help its developing member countries reduce poverty and improve the quality of life of their people. Despite the region’s many successes, it remains home to a large share of the world’s poor. ADB is committed to reducing poverty through inclusive economic growth, environmentally sustainable growth, and regional integration. Based in Manila, ADB is owned by 67 members, including 48 from the region. Its main instruments for helping its developing member countries are policy dialogue, loans, equity investments, guarantees, grants, and technical assistance. GUIDE ON BID EVALUATION June 2018 ASIAN DEVELOPMENT BANK 6 ADB Avenue, Mandaluyong City 1550 Metro Manila, Philippines www.adb.org ASIAN DEVELOPMENT BANK

Bid Evaluation Guide - Asian Development Bank (ADB)

Related documents

Products

Support

Bid Evaluation Guide - Asian Development Bank (ADB)

Related documents

Add this document to collection(s)

Add this document to saved

Suggest us how to improve StudyLib